Template:User Vegetarian

<mediawiki xmlns="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.10/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.10/ http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.10.xsd" version="0.10" xml:lang="en">
  <siteinfo>
    <sitename>Spacepedia</sitename>
    <dbname>spacepedia_prod</dbname>
    <base>https://spacepedia.wiki/w/Home</base>
    <generator>MediaWiki 1.34.2</generator>
    <case>first-letter</case>
    <namespaces>
      <namespace key="-2" case="first-letter">Media</namespace>
      <namespace key="-1" case="first-letter">Special</namespace>
      <namespace key="0" case="first-letter" />
      <namespace key="1" case="first-letter">Talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="2" case="first-letter">User</namespace>
      <namespace key="3" case="first-letter">User talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="4" case="first-letter">Spacepedia</namespace>
      <namespace key="5" case="first-letter">Spacepedia talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="6" case="first-letter">File</namespace>
      <namespace key="7" case="first-letter">File talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="8" case="first-letter">MediaWiki</namespace>
      <namespace key="9" case="first-letter">MediaWiki talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="10" case="first-letter">Template</namespace>
      <namespace key="11" case="first-letter">Template talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="12" case="first-letter">Help</namespace>
      <namespace key="13" case="first-letter">Help talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="14" case="first-letter">Category</namespace>
      <namespace key="15" case="first-letter">Category talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="2300" case="first-letter">Gadget</namespace>
      <namespace key="2301" case="first-letter">Gadget talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="2302" case="case-sensitive">Gadget definition</namespace>
      <namespace key="2303" case="case-sensitive">Gadget definition talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="3000" case="first-letter">Dictionary</namespace>
      <namespace key="3001" case="first-letter">Dictionary Talk</namespace>
    </namespaces>
  </siteinfo>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>245</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1348</id>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T01:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="321" xml:space="preserve">{| cellspacing="0"
| style="border: 1px #AFAFAF solid" |
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: green; text-align: center; " | '''V'''
| style=" padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a '''Vegetarian'''.
|}
|}


[[Category: User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>26ee5f0a7237891dd5a8f5ae6259b6f9253b1cf2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1349</id>
    <parentid>1348</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T01:22:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tweak attempt of test user template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="336" xml:space="preserve">{| cellspacing="0" 
| style="float: right; border: 1px #AFAFAF solid" |
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: green; text-align: center; " | '''V'''
| style=" padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a '''Vegetarian'''.
|}
|}


[[Category: User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>c3c5b9e91c0fa91277b008e42238f83748b88a96</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1350</id>
    <parentid>1349</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T01:27:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>now will the test user template behave correctly?</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">{| cellspacing="0" 
| style="border: 1px #AFAFAF solid; float: right;" |
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white;"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: green; text-align: center; " | '''V'''
| style=" padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a '''Vegetarian'''.
|}
|}


[[Category: User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>abce313fbbb846e4269ea8cbcc9f84884785a64e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1351</id>
    <parentid>1350</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T01:32:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>About to give up on getting it to behave as desired</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">{| cellspacing="0" 
| style="border: 1px #AFAFAF solid; float: right;" |
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white; float: right"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: green; text-align: center; " | '''V'''
| style=" padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a '''Vegetarian'''.
|}
|}


[[Category: User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>cccf0cda28d1a800ac4a59fa67702de568903a27</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1352</id>
    <parentid>1351</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T01:42:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Success!</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="332" xml:space="preserve">{| cellspacing="0" align="right"
| style="border: 1px #AFAFAF solid; float: right;" |
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: white; float: right"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: green; text-align: center; " | '''V'''
| style=" padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a '''Vegetarian'''.
|}
|}</text>
    <sha1>eeb665d7652c71634e75e2a61fdcc42583195093</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1353</id>
    <parentid>1352</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-05-25T23:29:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>pure html userbox, take 1.1</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px green solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #07BF07; text-align: center; color: black;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''V'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Vegetarian'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b2a3de7560877127dbf73d2cdf5bf6634e85652f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:License-Any</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>117</id>
  <revision>
    <id>355</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T20:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Test stock licence template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1175" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F"&gt;'''?'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is free under the terms of the as yet undetermined default license .&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

Usage:
If you really don't care what it's licensed as and just want less clutter on the page when a decision is reached.

[[Category:License templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;


&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 250px; width: 250px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px #0F00BF solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #0F00BF; text-align: center; color: white;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''!'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; border: 1px #0F00BF solid;width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Candidate'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;
--&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4c2b201262d15b78ed3ef3584c504cf26b111493</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>356</id>
    <parentid>355</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-16T01:02:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkered on language</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="751" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F"&gt;'''?'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the as yet undetermined default license or licenses.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

Usage:
If you really don't care what it's licensed as and just want less clutter on the page when a decision is reached.

[[Category:License templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3ab51a59d8314c888a5adb2406632c3e81cf7669</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:License-GFDL</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>119</id>
  <revision>
    <id>365</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T20:30:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''GFDL'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is free under the terms of the GNU Free Document License .&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles derived from Wikipedia.  Not recommended for new articles, as it may result in their removal once a license policy is determined.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>880c7cad9bc46895b105f93f5f9737234d946960</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>366</id>
    <parentid>365</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-16T00:57:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkered on language</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="834" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''GFDL'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the GNU Free Document License .&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles such as those derived from Wikipedia.  Not recommended for new articles, as it may result in their removal once a license policy is determined unless another, compatible license option is also available.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9dbf9d26c5f7bbed8c56eedc8dfcfec0d08926a3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:License-Any Attributive</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>118</id>
  <revision>
    <id>360</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T21:06:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="777" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Attribution'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is free under the terms of any attributive license.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have attribution for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate license.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>232421dbb00eb68dbc005dc955df8a10d7b4652b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>361</id>
    <parentid>360</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T21:22:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>specifying who specifies which licence</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="806" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Attribution'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is free under the terms of any attributive license selected by the Moon Society.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have attribution for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate license.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>59eb1465902cd609db8b6237f12157fe9c9448a9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>362</id>
    <parentid>361</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-16T01:00:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkered on language</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="840" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Attribution'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of any attributive license selected by the Moon Society.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have attribution for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate license.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dd2762ca9b6fa86b2a942a061d9c71a8d4c08068</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:License-Sharealike</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>121</id>
  <revision>
    <id>374</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T21:14:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="828" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Sharealike'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is free under the terms of any viral or share-alike license selected by the Moon Society.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have viral attributes for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate licensing option.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a0bbfb941fddcbb91b89e87976d9b834fcbf219</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>375</id>
    <parentid>374</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-16T00:46:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkered on language</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="884" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Sharealike'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all modifications are free under the terms of any viral or share-alike license selected by the Moon Society, unless this template is removed.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have viral attributes for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate licensing option.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c69f42d7b851afed7c7ef6df400dcdbb927801ab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:License-Public Domain</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>120</id>
  <revision>
    <id>369</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T21:31:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="594" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#D7FFBF"&gt;'''Public Domain'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all changes are released to the Public Domain.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
All Rights Released

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0c58c46cac7bbec6e26539441ed4ecf16a3e1118</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>370</id>
    <parentid>369</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-09-16T00:50:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkered on language.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="685" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#D7FFBF"&gt;'''Public Domain'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent changes are released to the Public Domain unless this template is removed.  Removal is not retroactive to previous states.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
All Rights Released

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>24c03e18c1499a8189ab52077d7f26717604852b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>228</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1261</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T22:56:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Test User Box</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="367" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>17560646745aac3d0915be02c3d97e6ef1dcca0b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>229</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1266</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:01:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Current director</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="360" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>34c9abc55cd78b2485688bbacbc32af240e581fb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Past Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>236</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1317</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:07:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>past director</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="357" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cc983693181e9b23b617fa68acb9878147a12f21</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User ASI Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>217</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1220</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:09:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Current or former ASI director</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="387" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ASI'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cdc4dde1b1e77cec28d7aa0db9775c207bb274a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>235</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1313</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:13:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>serving officer</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="359" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7732de8942e1bae4a1d5a9a9cbf35f5295d3a724</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Past Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>238</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1323</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:14:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>past moon society officer</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="356" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3acc78fdee0335cd129c4b8a226fa19897f1394d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User ASI Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>218</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1226</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:17:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>past or current ASI officer</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="384" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ASI'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>baad5d4bc8f8c51e5d41b6a27f8ffbf667a6c22d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User NSS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>232</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1282</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:29:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>current NSS member</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="404" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#CD1423" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9b3e503f939730773a8e0f93f7bbd9b0200f4da1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1283</id>
    <parentid>1282</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:15:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:white;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#CD1423" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>806b796b1b4dd98dc7068a6f159f05b90db0a06e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1284</id>
    <parentid>1283</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:25:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e7f9452762cf430bf1a02b219675e769a7996473</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1285</id>
    <parentid>1284</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:27:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:#CD1423" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c2cdeebb52888c261c681fa17227781ab16fca99</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1286</id>
    <parentid>1285</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:28:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="412" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:#CD1423 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e99cb8cfd83ce22103040a6bd66ebaf8c7cf3f47</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1287</id>
    <parentid>1286</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:29:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b7842331005407da323cdf7aef2909492e114983</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1288</id>
    <parentid>1287</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:30:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2ae7d5cf823a0bae07a672e4c267f25eca3b043a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1289</id>
    <parentid>1288</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:31:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>697dc09d776da989ea4b049044522b20381ebeac</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1290</id>
    <parentid>1289</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:35:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:43px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f97ba38416a0dbdb6e28cf1610b717c0424cca08</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1291</id>
    <parentid>1290</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:37:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tweak</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:41px;"
| style="width:43px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>75b804fcc10f10eb54295e924d65c86d2952be4a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1292</id>
    <parentid>1291</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T06:43:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tweak</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:42px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8e8b13447e365163f02b0888c8546eda5a654346</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1293</id>
    <parentid>1292</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:22:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:42px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>841be372d664a0d66b6d5ea003f02a3f91fd245c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1294</id>
    <parentid>1293</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:26:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:7pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4fce04c3309e9c1d644b6d2748fb6c184fe0a72c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1295</id>
    <parentid>1294</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:27:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:43px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:7pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>79506d1decdcedcc29a0f699391b3e2125c35dc3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1296</id>
    <parentid>1295</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:29:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:7pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>be81cba6386e149d43ca95e1c7cde0919ab2b217</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>560</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:38:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="312" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Stubs]]</text>
    <sha1>bc70727c4eb4ea2009f35b8b0d864be470b9b9b2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User NSS Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>233</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1305</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:55:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>current or former NSS officer</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="406" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#CD1423" | This user is a serving or former officer of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2968790327087a5a7f92cfb966393a8637e5a9d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>231</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1276</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-13T23:57:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>secving or former NSS director</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="407" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#CD1423" | This user is a serving or former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c06bdcef7d2052ebf9a884f7bcccf88821128a3f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User 1 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>212</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1196</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-14T00:00:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>One Digit Membership Number</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="378" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''1'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>875f03b64863966fd33e8639932d94d0993b1181</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User 2 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>213</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1204</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-14T00:01:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>2 digit membership number</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="378" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''2'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user has a '''TWO DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c1bb40f14c160b0a1e9676d2d35b24a107d1cd0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>224</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1248</id>
    <timestamp>2006-09-21T04:04:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c4b356489432d59bbbb95143462f91aa12ff6f3c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>230</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1271</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-05T15:31:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="362" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''TMS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is current list-master for the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5587db6a0551269257c8f9ebc381075e2ec3f853</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Template:User USMC</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>244</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1345</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-13T19:24:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Davew</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="328" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''USMC'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a former Marine.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4cbcca515be3a1c62ce9d9274d5b0670f71892a4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>943</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-17T23:52:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Billclawson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="398" xml:space="preserve">A SCRAMJet is a type of ramjet engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of Mach 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).</text>
    <sha1>fbc591439934014cea64ebe777d0badc7592e510</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1090</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-17T23:59:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Billclawson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="60" xml:space="preserve">http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=tether&amp;redirect=no</text>
    <sha1>7a5f71217023b782115a68539b854e36b7dc065d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1091</id>
    <parentid>1090</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T00:03:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Billclawson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Redirecting to [[Tether (disambiguation)]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="37" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Tether (disambiguation)]]</text>
    <sha1>ca8c645c551bd3c5dfa9141998a6be14de945ddc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User NSS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>232</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1297</id>
    <parentid>1296</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:31:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="418" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2d889ddc75aa7ef6722c04b7c5549d87c451d59b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1298</id>
    <parentid>1297</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:32:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="405" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2405eca3d5bfc585f98e567882aab05a1d847e66</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1299</id>
    <parentid>1298</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T10:23:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="424" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3e716fe618efa1315c4708279a397e839e7cb85a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1300</id>
    <parentid>1299</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:16:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="424" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3b5ac70a647cb8ce9af8632f557e5cf2f4ae8d7b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1301</id>
    <parentid>1300</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:19:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="424" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>da613c9fae7160eea1e887c023ae407c5e346a84</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User NSS Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>233</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1306</id>
    <parentid>1305</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:35:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="407" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former officer of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>99cbfc9df243dbe5a9352ca7fe427c3373c7d0cf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1307</id>
    <parentid>1306</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:37:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="426" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former officer of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>240e2625adb807bf0fe67181fd12fa25f1f71de6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>231</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1277</id>
    <parentid>1276</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:44:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="408" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #CD1423 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#1446A0;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | '''NSS'''
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>78f33235cd5495d0b9c4505ffe76d2b848e95c2f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1278</id>
    <parentid>1277</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:37:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="427" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cbb80fd72379c4b50a94e7fe9197bb15cf043c91</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User 1 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>212</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1197</id>
    <parentid>1196</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:45:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="368" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''1'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1a87c90692ac629500455899875cf377db29dfea</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1198</id>
    <parentid>1197</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:47:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="407" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]'''1'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b5b65cb21882cad2ef3b42278a63a747966d45ed</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1199</id>
    <parentid>1198</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T14:10:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="368" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''1'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2b3f7d183cc297ab81c13aa49f1760736d28ca45</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1200</id>
    <parentid>1199</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T14:12:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="381" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:#BF7F00" | '''1'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>361f2b2ecc231a78aefdfd7dcff296ca0bb4fcc0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1201</id>
    <parentid>1200</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T15:20:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="415" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_1.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d647d6196573bae623b3e793383cafd51d3a204c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User 2 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>213</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1205</id>
    <parentid>1204</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:46:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="368" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''2'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''TWO DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d684af0b13d438d54ae0201b3a5d2a7f09afbed6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1206</id>
    <parentid>1205</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T15:21:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="402" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_2.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''TWO DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>566386d28689e459a31a3c3b7047e6de63c4ad35</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User 3 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>214</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1209</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:49:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="370" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''2'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>136467ac7b3aa2795b2dd718d340f97b684dd4c6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1210</id>
    <parentid>1209</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:50:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="370" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''3'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5710364943f4857c327d800ad05319631cb055c6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1211</id>
    <parentid>1210</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:52:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Bronze and matching the new colors</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="383" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | '''3'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>49c52fed676760dd8140a6cf946d417e24f872d9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1212</id>
    <parentid>1211</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T15:22:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="417" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_3.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>28e81002240eb56cf889d0e22c9ea056e55650dc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User ASI Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>217</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1221</id>
    <parentid>1220</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:53:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="374" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ASI'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50932f0e4a4459a52e7a2566688d99d6ba02a23c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1222</id>
    <parentid>1221</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T10:00:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="393" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>37f6417fbb2a89a2689ac1d2d15086953573c32b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1223</id>
    <parentid>1222</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:34:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="393" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bf9b568ed9bfb1c5cea583f5d88e6161af4cdc35</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User ASI Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>218</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1227</id>
    <parentid>1226</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T07:54:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="371" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''ASI'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8054109f77293e9355cd543c6a2828561ca3c9cc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1228</id>
    <parentid>1227</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T10:01:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7854ab0747c845a2adc340d80efc8551ab9ede14</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1229</id>
    <parentid>1228</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:21:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d16ea2d33dae86924b571c92dc6380ca68e8b0ab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:License-Public Domain</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>120</id>
  <revision>
    <id>371</id>
    <parentid>370</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-18T22:22:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>updating for current status, but still needs work</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="808" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#D7FFBF"&gt;'''Public Domain'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all articles and their revisions in the main namespace are released to the Public Domain and can be used when attribution or sharing of changes are not feasible.  Articles in in other namespaces, such as GFDL and CC Lunar are NOT released to the Public Domain.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
All Rights Released

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95af88b9b574c69b0e3045396f1a56eab0e5ad2b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>228</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1262</id>
    <parentid>1261</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T10:16:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="397" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4e843f48d0beacbac850d08238af0ef371653d94</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1263</id>
    <parentid>1262</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:25:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="397" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6b9425c805597eddd3ad4fb67a8e91ce9f3e52f3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>229</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1267</id>
    <parentid>1266</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:39:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f67d4b0345ccc324cf1c9519f292498c09c023a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Past Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>236</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1318</id>
    <parentid>1317</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:39:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="387" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fb52f5874dc9ebf019b77330fffd7b3c87d91d07</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>235</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1314</id>
    <parentid>1313</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:40:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="389" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2fc43a4db7e08ca155e91e7e76501a9bf9905a51</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Past Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>238</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1324</id>
    <parentid>1323</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T13:41:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77ec96cb5aa9fdf43c44419bf290544e51ad108c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>230</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1272</id>
    <parentid>1271</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T17:51:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="392" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is current list-master for the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2cd48e657815790d143c5b2fa07096c44e4edc78</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>223</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1242</id>
    <timestamp>2006-10-20T22:08:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="378" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0419996a8525e08661d20b701c2d3e2dbf684612</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>151</id>
    <timestamp>2006-11-01T23:40:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Stubs]]</text>
    <sha1>6a81362e2b4b9306ce726b54c4f19f1697a9a9cc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>152</id>
    <parentid>151</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-11-04T00:17:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Added possible error notice</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="396" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Stubs]]</text>
    <sha1>259597e4fcab3a17415f390e91e54928ccaf8fa9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>522</id>
    <timestamp>2006-11-04T00:49:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="345" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what's wrong with in in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0c886b6852d5bb077a7c97b8341c31527c3c8520</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>523</id>
    <parentid>522</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-11-04T01:00:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkering</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="335" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50e21b1ca14917e31b091cc88be1eb3c87211996</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>672</id>
    <timestamp>2006-11-13T05:47:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="598" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Stub}}
[[Category:Defunct companies]]</text>
    <sha1>d2735942e4e195482a4bf0521da561e519168e27</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>604</id>
    <timestamp>2006-12-07T20:45:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Needs Formatting]]</text>
    <sha1>40afa88a2ab0af77c88ba2e43b9d63c5434cba97</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>754</id>
    <timestamp>2006-12-31T18:24:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, Dr. Alex Walthem mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from lunar regolith.   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.</text>
    <sha1>d1a109f8b4b2f3b640acba0ba5d225ea15189ca2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>755</id>
    <parentid>754</parentid>
    <timestamp>2006-12-31T18:33:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Category:Transportation]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="466" xml:space="preserve">Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, Dr. Alex Walthem mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from lunar regolith.   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>9d62bdb038fcba7386dfac0c2188199d122dc1d5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>756</id>
    <parentid>755</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-01T16:46:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="518" xml:space="preserve">Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, Dr. Alex Walthem mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from lunar regolith.   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>7fa4378c935dc66f370622853973bb76c9cba6be</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>944</id>
    <parentid>943</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-01T11:44:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Category:Components</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="423" xml:space="preserve">A SCRAMJet is a type of ramjet engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of Mach 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).

[[Category:Components]]</text>
    <sha1>ee7b59383eb4a4f18c7ed2ed9000628742486487</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>945</id>
    <parentid>944</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-02T14:48:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">A SCRAMJet is a type of ramjet engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of Mach 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>c66cbdaa1abe145a57e529e17d816cd739344d85</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1092</id>
    <parentid>1091</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-02T14:33:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1093</id>
    <parentid>1092</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-02T14:34:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>remove redirect</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="511" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
&gt; It needs zero propellant, and
zero energy input &lt;.

External link: http://www.tethers.com

[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>70cf5cec4c4ec1b542326ef350f0c003a9d6299e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1094</id>
    <parentid>1093</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-02T17:36:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>clarify energy / propellant input needed</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="592" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

External link: http://www.tethers.com

[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>f0f74249fa97f034e63abaf0f810a123e49f6025</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20061018073145|1297">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>924</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-02T14:44:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>GTO stages to tow suborbital payloads into LEO</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3044" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a tether to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>c0924610da9aa559edad32ac6c3da4082927bcd5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1095</id>
    <parentid>1094</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-04T19:05:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>adding stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="602" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

External link: http://www.tethers.com


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>6c0701080ba5df47c2bd2def052255106ad27317</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>946</id>
    <parentid>945</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-04T19:07:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>adding stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="489" xml:space="preserve">A SCRAMJet is a type of ramjet engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of Mach 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>3cf626dd9cc14b89c6ec4aef14fddf85f6e59dd0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Template:Cleanup</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>77</id>
  <revision>
    <id>180</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-04T19:14:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="366" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Cleanup]]</text>
    <sha1>e139f876e54c40fa9919409bc3e4f36a6660dda9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>181</id>
    <parentid>180</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-08T11:55:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>replacing float with width to make this less prone to worstening messes</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="366" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Cleanup]]</text>
    <sha1>8c3031552e4d921d23d5cb498f1420d80c26cf07</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>757</id>
    <parentid>756</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-04T19:18:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="528" xml:space="preserve">Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, Dr. Alex Walthem mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from lunar regolith.   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>f9ae2d0582c0d983a9a943e316412b3367f25d06</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>925</id>
    <parentid>924</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-04T19:28:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added cleanup tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3057" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a tether to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>76c186feb70a30b7d6427ec918cdb3f6b17f1420</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>605</id>
    <parentid>604</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-05T08:38:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Category change</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Cleanup]]</text>
    <sha1>d17383b166ff6b22f789a479337bfc3112311efc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>606</id>
    <parentid>605</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-08T11:58:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>trying to replace float with width without breaking this</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="478" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:300px"&gt;
{| style="width:300px"
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center;width=300px" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Cleanup]]</text>
    <sha1>8a2490aef819304619cca55786db36d0fcc01c05</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>788</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:14:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="21" xml:space="preserve">[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3b52df9ceec321ed72cfc843972f0054eb3605ee</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>789</id>
    <parentid>788</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:28:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="509" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed)

[[Ariane-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after failed orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Orbital launches planned but not attempted

[[Babylon Gun]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4b5e7e9d985a151e9674a5a146699e9e33baf855</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>790</id>
    <parentid>789</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:45:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="920" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed)

[[Ariane-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>592ae34b607100a3a2c5f088c5c4e2e8559a5d5a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>791</id>
    <parentid>790</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:46:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="920" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed)

[[Ariane-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e45fd4360e762f4e6255dbf06ba2588b3e8d7387</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>792</id>
    <parentid>791</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:47:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="941" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed)

[[Ariane-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e21ba22b95465cea20b66575ac4be100db419092</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>793</id>
    <parentid>792</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T13:48:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="969" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed)

[[Ariane-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - last flew July 15th, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f69d2661153dc36bb99c1ab16bf10ccdd325bbd6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>794</id>
    <parentid>793</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T14:28:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1069" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - with last flew date)

[[Ariane-4]] 15 February 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] 28, October 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1682151fe289c1ce4689565f60386d2cb6afa0e1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>795</id>
    <parentid>794</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T14:31:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Davew</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1084" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - with last flew date)

[[Ariane-4]] 15 February 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] 28, October 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2e8608648b9073f6e64abd3382018f3637e2ee82</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>796</id>
    <parentid>795</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:00:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1127" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - with last flew date)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Juno]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c57002da1d95948090682bcd5e54df7fc1ed9c08</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>797</id>
    <parentid>796</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:01:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1159" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - with last flew date)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>64efe5c9809db024ea8b11097235d61cedd4f146</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>798</id>
    <parentid>797</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:01:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1167" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b93ef45fd6001247b25cea5152ee3659a95c45c8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>799</id>
    <parentid>798</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:02:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1182" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>817dd8a732aa10b11b3f8a6484987ad9564fe2cd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>800</id>
    <parentid>799</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:03:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1204" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bb9374cd91a661e8a6bef190bf6d4baaa57e0ac7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>801</id>
    <parentid>800</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:04:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1220" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;


No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>89d3196bce0dbf64fc0cfb573f510a22f746c66a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>802</id>
    <parentid>801</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:05:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1240" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32a402b1133a8d0c9a2e158b6e8b2b4e75487ff0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>803</id>
    <parentid>802</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T15:08:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1261" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Start/Topol]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2155831248be87eb190f79c4e18271385f288b80</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>804</id>
    <parentid>803</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T16:01:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Start-1 is still flying</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1240" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32a402b1133a8d0c9a2e158b6e8b2b4e75487ff0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>805</id>
    <parentid>804</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-06T20:40:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1270" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7a33d9fe9584d11e2e80b50b12b5f73d26a41bfe</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Template:PD Violation</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>141</id>
  <revision>
    <id>468</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-07T22:12:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="649" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:3px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: This article may have content that is not in the public domain!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the problem content can be identified, please remove it immediately!
*If not already relocated, this article should be moved outside of the main namespace.
*If the content can not be identified, rewrite this article from scratch with the assumption that the entire article is in someone else's copyright.  Upon completion of such a rewrite, delete this article.&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Violations]]</text>
    <sha1>627aec14215662e245ec725ab35ec3d8fc91ac4c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>469</id>
    <parentid>468</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-07T23:32:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="772" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: This article may have content that is not in the public domain!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the problem content can be identified, please remove it immediately!
*If not already relocated, this article should be moved outside of the main namespace.
*If the content can not be identified, rewrite this article from scratch with the assumption that the entire article is in someone else's copyright.  Upon completion of such a rewrite, delete this article.&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

[[Category:Violations]]</text>
    <sha1>d14cd9502c3f4922913e17b6bb601283c783748e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>561</id>
    <parentid>560</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-08T11:46:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing float attribute to se if that makes this less prone to causing messes</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="312" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:Stubs]]</text>
    <sha1>9ff844a6407d22f6c5b4f64cf832439c0726c59a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>685</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-08T22:24:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="965" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1933, the ''British Interplanetary Society'' (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight.  Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership.  It publishes a technical journal, ''Journal of British Interplanetary Society'', a monthly general interest magazine, ''Spaceflight'', a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, ''Space Chronicle'', and a magazine for children, ''Voyage''.  Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930.  It still exists in the form of the  [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]], following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences.

&lt;BR&gt;
{{Stub}}
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;
==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>3243bb4ec76d7bfb4b1b561dd5aeb23b71be8ffb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070104190557|1095">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>853</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T21:58:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="72" xml:space="preserve">This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.</text>
    <sha1>c938f1e6d106cdff1ccc163def99b37b46a16d31</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>854</id>
    <parentid>853</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T22:55:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Table Templates added</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8057" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.

==Brazil==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>3ae7f82e87deda4e54eebb07fe0596af0f16fcd4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>855</id>
    <parentid>854</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T22:56:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Do not edit.  work in progress</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8078" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  DO NOT EDIT!   yet.

==Brazil==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>ce6e386cfcf4a5e09530cd372f01de3ae7248a44</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>856</id>
    <parentid>855</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T23:24:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8111" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  DO NOT EDIT!   yet.

==Brazil==
{| style="width:75%" border="1"
!width=34%|Booster
!width=33%|Operational Status
!width=33%|Vendor
|-


| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>fbc5d6d8eba440e80510d466af05c22af31350bd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>857</id>
    <parentid>856</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T23:28:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8080" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  DO NOT EDIT!   yet.

==Brazil==
{| style="width:75%" border="1"
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{|

| '''Booster''' || '''Operational Status''' || '''Vendor''' ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>68bac5982c3d61873fa06c9d9dfad1c0f0565585</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>858</id>
    <parentid>857</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-11T23:37:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Page is ready for editing</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7922" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>96eb6c4a94427af130e39b659fe414cc1e41f2a0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>859</id>
    <parentid>858</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T00:07:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>first cut at populating</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7348" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Isreal==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>27af2f7da3a79151073e4872bb1b5bd18deef1f6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>860</id>
    <parentid>859</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T00:24:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Ariane et al</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5554" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==China==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/ ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Isreal==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Japan==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}</text>
    <sha1>df8f4510fa10adf352472a8f3353c500231e5375</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>861</id>
    <parentid>860</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T00:51:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>more data entered</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8052" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
!Booster
!Operational Status
!Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>3ede84b661655d277a4c7fe5da0532f82ecd9510</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>862</id>
    <parentid>861</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T06:17:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Standardized cell width</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8598" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>eb8ea5604f28221b6eba2267b8fa0145141be887</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>863</id>
    <parentid>862</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T06:39:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  added data</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9293" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>5de4e0dddd277bd4e02531b109f367a0fe44cc9a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>864</id>
    <parentid>863</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T06:51:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  added more data</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9528" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>fbc746b428333bd7033d8de3b1e5f44ba128183c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>865</id>
    <parentid>864</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T07:17:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  More Data</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9813" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>e7d4b9204d864ebd3c8757980d6b3db9542a9724</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>866</id>
    <parentid>865</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T07:55:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>/* United States */  More Data</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10160" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>9f2cc8604d0ed41bc3772a5b3e5109913f8b9006</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>867</id>
    <parentid>866</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T08:22:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  More Data</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10446" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>47e3857be1786d9a5a3e59196336e92aca0c1fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>868</id>
    <parentid>867</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T13:37:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>24.20.228.186</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  Falcon I - Launch Attempted</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10444" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>100c13d40e4e1629707c85d97989c8063db31062</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>869</id>
    <parentid>868</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T21:35:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added Energia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10486" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}</text>
    <sha1>8461b453222d884127f2291da4c4e166c1f0887f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>870</id>
    <parentid>869</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T21:50:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Added reference</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11336" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>49432cd212e9a2785db0b1a39109d72956b86220</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>871</id>
    <parentid>870</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T21:52:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* International */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11373" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] - see Russia|| Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] - see U. S. || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>8efe372f2d81cc691b05a56ed4ae6e04e580d08e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>872</id>
    <parentid>871</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:02:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Russia */  Russian vendors and statuses</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11936" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] - see Russia|| Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] - see U. S. || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>a825d3c9e5a93e6d3d2e6b67d7259aebc24af2ba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>873</id>
    <parentid>872</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:04:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Russia */  deleting junk</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11935" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] - see Russia|| Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] - see U. S. || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>5d92d93a25ba449b53b60c5a00a2d154cd866c1f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>874</id>
    <parentid>873</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:12:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */  addign vendors and status</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="12084" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-

|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] - see Russia|| Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| [[Atlas V]] - see U. S. || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]] || Future Development || [[TSpace|t/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>b78cff51d1c6df7d14ea9d3013c29742493e31cb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>875</id>
    <parentid>874</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:18:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>changed to two sections, existing and future</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10616" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[Ares-1]] ([[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-

| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>173f69ea86ed3a36267827d0664a73cdb495c1f3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>876</id>
    <parentid>875</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:24:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>corrected Ares and CXV</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10759" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}


==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>2ba5a91e49edc27038c22daca0781c0fb8dae57a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>877</id>
    <parentid>876</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:26:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>corrected alphabetical order</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10756" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] |||-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>547f2c32a690ba6023b8590963ee59b0bf10deb1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>878</id>
    <parentid>877</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:28:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>misformatting corrected</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10758" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>fbd283c4d8d92965d6df31c7a5f2093137c9e025</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>879</id>
    <parentid>878</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:29:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Russia */  restoring Russian stuff somebody deleted</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11322" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>8ec6fcd08ce25ff830cf1fb33769b9fc2a0e0885</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>880</id>
    <parentid>879</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:31:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Russia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11431" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>151bf232c955501e0d3b04f7bbe6ea90c2d84891</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>881</id>
    <parentid>880</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:31:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Russia */  Angara</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11495" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>3821bd569b3952d2a28b40bf8f2255c22aead825</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>882</id>
    <parentid>881</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:33:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */  restoring deleted Ukraine info</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11509" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>80f008b89de9a17f23a0b01f83c30cca2cfb13b9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>883</id>
    <parentid>882</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:34:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */  Sea Launch</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11567" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service || insert vendor ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>1b06248b3d129790d75ce159bfa6ef18a58ddd82</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>884</id>
    <parentid>883</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:37:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */  restoring deleted Ukraine info</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11648" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]][http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm
http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>45a239d5d1b1bdadb71f05678b1d00e169b87fee</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>885</id>
    <parentid>884</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T22:38:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */  formating</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11649" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

===          ----------EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS----------===

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

===          ----------PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT----------===


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>70b1d81991b612da77734b92c47c3cb61d9ae019</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>886</id>
    <parentid>885</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T23:17:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.96.117.195</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>more =s means a lower, not higher, level</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11581" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-

| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>dc3edce99483911e6575c4d4d39a73381b1b1dd7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>887</id>
    <parentid>886</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-12T23:30:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.96.117.195</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>commenting out reference content</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11729" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || status needed || vendor needed ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || status needed || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>789004b6316ded0151def30e09796e6da876cbe2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>888</id>
    <parentid>887</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:33:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS */  Categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11810" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists will be merged.  Tables are Ready

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || status needed || vendor needed ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || status needed || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>53b78bba45161dadfdf3cbe1b4ffe38d265d2c63</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>889</id>
    <parentid>888</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:35:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>update history</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11795" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || status needed || vendor needed ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || status needed || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=


==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]</text>
    <sha1>a5ba052d83fa8ae662a62629d60f9ef7ae86c264</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>890</id>
    <parentid>889</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:37:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>moved  (Korea Republic of)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11794" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab]]  || status needed || vendor needed ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || status needed || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>d750ceb12a79926abd11d91bb1792d624e0276c9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>891</id>
    <parentid>890</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:47:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Iran Shahab details</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11874" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || status needed || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>4896647c8c518353bdfe774a63fad3dcf78607ba</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>892</id>
    <parentid>891</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:48:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Korea (Republic of) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11885" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt; ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]&lt;  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>7b341e9165c7d736af755583d6d21c7284a144eb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>893</id>
    <parentid>892</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:49:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* European Union */  clean up</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11883" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=EXISTING AND HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>fdd6a14d6c13ed16ddf084a6b48be93907257d6d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>894</id>
    <parentid>893</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:58:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>splitting existing and historical launchers</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11850" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>1d2be73dbe201edf6419c55f9e4f8c6bde683c5a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>895</id>
    <parentid>894</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T19:49:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Russia */  Angara - Khrunichev</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11960" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS=

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>0b6454ba8ae12aa760ae91945612764f8f0ee1ab</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>896</id>
    <parentid>895</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T19:59:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>moving Angara+Soyuz-2+Brazil+KDPR</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11919" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==References==
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>8be354f0f44374f63687aea4dbf562a966d1fe29</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>897</id>
    <parentid>896</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-14T05:36:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>References was at the wrong heirarchal level</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11917" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>97a5b5590002b932e51b4bf0e8f5649ba017d764</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>898</id>
    <parentid>897</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T16:14:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Ukraine */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11962" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>b173e9a94c522285639258f69d4647f951233779</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>899</id>
    <parentid>898</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T16:23:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* References */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="12116" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  
*[http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link]

*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>b268df870d01e63129edd29580b191b869163961</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>900</id>
    <parentid>899</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T16:25:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>/* References */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="12136" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==India==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==International==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

==Israel==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Brazil==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==European Union==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}

==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}

==Russia==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-


|}

==United States==
{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>acf9a54214f8a345e96fbd6a5081f6017bc3e3ec</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>901</id>
    <parentid>900</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T22:13:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>table formatting; removed 'components' categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13545" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>dadf078afaca7c85ceef99c45cf98276362afef9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>902</id>
    <parentid>901</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-17T03:31:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fixed formatting - several launchers disappeared...now restored</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13552" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>6fa9a1f204af944aa36809087882aaff70591c20</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>806</id>
    <parentid>805</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T04:58:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>moved Energia to here</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1478" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

==Russia==

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>aa9afb4ade5551e773dc418c3e367dab4609fc5b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>807</id>
    <parentid>806</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-14T05:41:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>given how this looks compared to the other list, added {{Cleanup}}; added categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1565" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

==Russia==

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

No launches attempted

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>662c0517f3ec63f12f07f6a76a4b2685bbf91011</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>808</id>
    <parentid>807</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-20T15:41:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added countries</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1691" xml:space="preserve">Cancelled after achieving orbit
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>bc97427dacedc516845292c536860a247a7acd7b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>827</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T17:35:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="63" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==
==Unlicensed==
[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]</text>
    <sha1>8a9f79110a6c0d3ecc57243cebfa1af28f15f05f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>828</id>
    <parentid>827</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:05:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="115" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==
*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]
*[[Cape Canaveral]]
*[[White Sands]]
*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>b8f594eccf5b0556a4c2912cb22caf7f76d600cc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>829</id>
    <parentid>828</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:32:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added more</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="405" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatiale Guiannaise]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>67ad06e653e3d638c89ba11fc927ed36ae064ac6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>830</id>
    <parentid>829</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:35:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  Kwajelin</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="420" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatiale Guiannaise]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>8e0e84c7c83abf0e9b65fe8d49b0cfd6dd967b20</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>831</id>
    <parentid>830</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:36:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  Churchill</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatiale Guiannaise]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>44649c047d40c5e3d51126c11b5e2f3b2dd63824</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>832</id>
    <parentid>831</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:40:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Davew</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatiale Guiannaise]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>55438727f3e9901693d5edd4cb43556c7f61a2f1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>833</id>
    <parentid>832</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:53:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  re-order</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatiale Guiannaise]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>f7e5e4d9dc6fe15762aaaa77251f31f1a6d8c059</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>834</id>
    <parentid>833</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T18:55:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  CSG</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="491" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==</text>
    <sha1>bdd5594e11f7693d088539c45ba51838eb6ee131</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>835</id>
    <parentid>834</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T19:32:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category - transportation</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="520" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>fa1e676aa49e8e285a019653245615e2272146c1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>836</id>
    <parentid>835</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T19:39:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Japan, China, Israel, Alaska, Hamaguir</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="627" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]]

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]]

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]]

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]]

*[[Western Test Range]]

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)</text>
    <sha1>396f0ff4577f648cbea41ad19363277bb13a300b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>837</id>
    <parentid>836</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-13T19:46:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added various sites and platforms</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="799" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)</text>
    <sha1>281e2917503c0ffd573f4e0a6f2809c06187e86c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>Template:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>209</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1182</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-14T07:09:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1444" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0px;margin:0px;font-family:'Purisa','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten"&gt;
{| STYLE = "margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "height:18px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| /
| 
| 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S A N D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R E G O L I T H &amp;nbsp; B O X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
|   .       
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
|    .
| 
|     (    
|  
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
|  _
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
|       ,
| 
|        .
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;</text>
    <sha1>643231a9be6e20b878e299257590a2ed1908b95d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1183</id>
    <parentid>1182</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-14T15:49:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Formatting tweaks</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1901" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0px;margin:0px;font-family:'Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten;filter:progid:dximagetransform.microsoft.emboss"&gt;&lt;!-- emboss is MSIE only, unfortunately, which also means I can't test it from here --&gt;
{| STYLE = "margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "height:8px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; .
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; / &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ~
| 
| 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S&amp;nbsp;A&amp;nbsp;N&amp;nbsp;D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;E&amp;nbsp;G&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;L&amp;nbsp;I&amp;nbsp;T&amp;nbsp;H &amp;nbsp; B&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.       
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;,
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(    
|  
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
| &amp;nbsp;_
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;</text>
    <sha1>072d26edcf53eab1982ad62f429998a8c4a8bb5a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>211</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-14T07:50:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>For itemless lists</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="705" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F" STYLE="font-family:'Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS','Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi',Script,Handwritten"&gt;'''L'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;

[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]</text>
    <sha1>6cd504fad63350dd4f857951f4992b4386bed578</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>Template:Test Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>163</id>
  <revision>
    <id>574</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T19:51:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Mimic of Autostub tag without category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="440" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;!-- Real autostub will include stub category link(s) here --&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4f07f547f0f8e2882a5216e400a56018ab3312dc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070112220413|873">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>777</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T21:54:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub and link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1163" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the [[ion engine]], which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}</text>
    <sha1>5c4b0b85f35ed237219834ac88058b8593184ebe</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>778</id>
    <parentid>777</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-16T22:33:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>droped non-existing link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1159" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}</text>
    <sha1>d1a219b87786d478b7e4d0a647fdd78527206bb2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>809</id>
    <parentid>808</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-20T15:43:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>format</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1729" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>00398aba571304eab4e87d801bc87050bb29b547</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>810</id>
    <parentid>809</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-20T15:50:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* European Union */  more countries details</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1771" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>70f1ef22e16629092898803ce772eb54e2b3d9e8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>811</id>
    <parentid>810</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-20T15:53:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* No launches attempted */  more countries</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1821" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>f4eae2fae5ff87ec2a28f67eb9517f3e28be9065</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>812</id>
    <parentid>811</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T14:40:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* USA */  American Rocket Company</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1862" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>26e182c2f5c558c07598a0902b42fd68d3931a3b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>813</id>
    <parentid>812</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T14:44:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* USA */  Amroc</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1858" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>eacfead1199234c398a999b0d097c0cc4e0e1b3a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>814</id>
    <parentid>813</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T14:45:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* USA */  Amroc - ILV</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1934" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>74502e32bc041802cf76b74fc70b50b8aedcf34e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>815</id>
    <parentid>814</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T22:17:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* USA */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2030" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003&lt;BR/&gt;

====United Kingdom====

[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 &lt;BR/&gt;

====France====

[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999&lt;BR/&gt;
*Conestoga
*Saturn-1b
*[[Saturn-V]]/[[Apollo]]
*Scout
*Titan-II
*Titan-III
*Titan-IV
*Vanguard

===Russia/USSR===

[[Energia]] - November 15, 1988&lt;BR/&gt;

{| width=75%
! width=34% | Booster
! width=33% | Operational Status
! width=33% | Vendor
|-

| [[Energia]]/[[Buran]] || two launches, one success || NPO Energia (no longer manufactured) ||

|}

===USA===

[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Titan-4]] -  October 19, 2005&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959&lt;BR/&gt;

===Japan===

[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970&lt;BR/&gt;


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

[[Conestoga]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Europe/ELDO===

[[Europa-II]]&lt;BR/&gt;

===Russia/USSR ===
[[N-1]]&lt;BR/&gt;

==Successful Suborbital launches (orbital launches planned)==

===Germany===

[[Otrag]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==Un-successful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

[[Dolphin]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Percheron]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-33]] &lt;BR/&gt;

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>41efa0e76fdb5133b1f1a5e3b75110361965cd25</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>816</id>
    <parentid>815</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T22:28:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>som mis-formatting and duplication corrected</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1695" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
(when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight)

===European Union===

*[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====

*[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 

====France====

*[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===

*[[Energia]]/[[Buran]] - November 15, 1988

===USA===

*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999
*[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961
*[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975
*[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973 (see [[Apollo]])
*[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994
*[[Titan-IV]] -  October 19, 2005
*[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959

===Japan===

*[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==

===USA===

*[[Conestoga]]

===Europe/ELDO===

*[[Europa-II]]

===Russia/USSR ===
*[[N-1]]

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==

===Germany===

*[[Otrag]] 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==

===USA===

*[[Dolphin]]
*[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) 
*[[Percheron]] 
*[[X-33]] 

==No launches attempted==

===Russia===

[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===

[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===

[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


{{Cleanup}}

[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>361be05ca67d2056763c6c3ee88d2065cce7728e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>838</id>
    <parentid>837</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-23T19:26:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="856" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)</text>
    <sha1>915292b63e64ef4552d04fd459dd3e707a30916a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>839</id>
    <parentid>838</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-27T13:31:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Unlicensed */  see also</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="958" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b84789e9dfe54d03a2f99fbb7c293646d8d60a04</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>840</id>
    <parentid>839</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T13:47:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="999" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3e95050b81cfd7be5fac28195d888c7fdf4b1a43</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>841</id>
    <parentid>840</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T13:51:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Unlicensed */  NASA B-52B</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1078" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>588d41187fa1777262f8bb7e99d3a4ee9fceef67</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>842</id>
    <parentid>841</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-04T17:07:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>cats</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1136" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>b3b4c3b864234e41026fe60e110e22df1cbd1b82</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>843</id>
    <parentid>842</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-04T19:32:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Category:Spaceports]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1160" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Sea Launch]] (Floating mobile platform)

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>90ad823ac7edd9390d1f3e63b9be69c7598dc8ea</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1096</id>
    <parentid>1095</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-28T15:14:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>24.20.228.186</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Star Tech links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="898" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

==External links== 

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>245f811fa2dc17ae732997054d9ba63043cf3585</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1097</id>
    <parentid>1096</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-28T15:28:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Star Technology and Research, Inc</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="932" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

==See also== 

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>b7f8839e3bc3281026948f413dff194a73de7428</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1098</id>
    <parentid>1097</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-28T15:39:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tether Applications</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1028" xml:space="preserve">Possibly the simplest and most elegant approach is the method of momentum
exchange by tethers, from Tethers Unlimited.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

==See also== 

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>ec24ad0fc1fdb7ef8dc5d8bf2815b95432f48c57</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1099</id>
    <parentid>1098</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T21:58:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1391" xml:space="preserve">A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]].

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  &lt;BR&gt;
If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage&lt;BR&gt;

==See also== 

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>e10881ecc028911a283987929f99f57a3da6d4cb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1100</id>
    <parentid>1099</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T22:09:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>link to momentum from GTO</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1474" xml:space="preserve">A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]].

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]

==External Links== 

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>f5fefc1bf57c98ebcfeb8fc077e52cd82322f3ed</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Wikipedia</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>172</id>
  <revision>
    <id>611</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-28T18:24:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>For articles derived from Wikipedia.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="615" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''WP'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from [http://wikipedia.org Wikipedia].&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
[[Category:Wikipedia Based Articles]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles derived from Wikipedia.

[[Category:Attribution Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42f82dc1ad3f5ebb3e5246006a1226421df4c282</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>612</id>
    <parentid>611</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T15:44:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="672" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''WP'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from [http://wikipedia.org Wikipedia].&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Wikipedia Based Articles]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles derived from Wikipedia.

[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cc34e93fb039b3b17b0903aa046fc3d5ed1fef92</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>153</id>
    <parentid>152</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T03:16:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization tweaking</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="510" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a2ec14a13f26907347c5dd29e06216dc708da55d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>154</id>
    <parentid>153</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-12T02:30:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tweak attempt</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="499" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a15ba45199e5ef7e6b5cdcf71b1eaaaf60dc2ec7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>155</id>
    <parentid>154</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-12T02:52:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tweak attempt, then mangled to try to get past the @%$; *&amp;%!! DIV SPAM filter</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="530" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;D*I*V style="pad*ding:4p*t;li*ne-he*ight:1.*25e*m;back*ground:#EFEFEF;f*ont-siz*e:8*pt;"&gt; --&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;!-- &lt;/DIV&gt; --&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f06f4ae5d9f32696f5003d0b1a03432255360bb5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Cleanup</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>77</id>
  <revision>
    <id>182</id>
    <parentid>181</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T03:18:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization tweaks</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e91b61716b442a064ced5b90802907f2962d9fa2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>212</id>
    <parentid>211</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T03:20:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization tweakage</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="814" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F" STYLE="font-family:'Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS','Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi',Script,Handwritten"&gt;'''L'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ca023726a4ebede712a56ee7fff13e887546f6c6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:License-Any</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>117</id>
  <revision>
    <id>357</id>
    <parentid>356</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T03:27:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Categorization tweakage; changing usage notes</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="910" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F"&gt;'''?'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the as yet undetermined default license or licenses.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is obsolete as of the decision to segregate content into three separate namespaces and should not be used.  For content that you do not care about the license, put the article in the main namespace where it will be released to the public domain.

[[Category:License templates]]
[[Category:Obsolete Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e6ed7707be325921b9ce18745e7185b26ac734e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:PD Violation</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>141</id>
  <revision>
    <id>470</id>
    <parentid>469</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T03:53:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization tweakage</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="886" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: This article may have content that is not in the public domain!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the problem content can be identified, please remove it immediately!
*If not already relocated, this article should be moved outside of the main namespace.
*If the content can not be identified, rewrite this article from scratch with the assumption that the entire article is in someone else's copyright.  Upon completion of such a rewrite, delete this article.&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d4628753d11cd711a087d3124571f19e3c5e92e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>673</id>
    <parentid>672</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T14:38:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>changing category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="588" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>4aabc3a82437a9cf711ac7d8788cc3b99291a59d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>674</id>
    <parentid>673</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T14:46:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>ILV</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="655" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>25006945aae07dc60806cbd31b79597d4648cd4f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>524</id>
    <parentid>523</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T15:22:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added tag category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f6f3fcc4f42f190f846ace55f51c0eca4d3b9b15</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>525</id>
    <parentid>524</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-02T00:00:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removed float</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="405" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>46b41a09158ab30990721a805989a4eeda9891bd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>562</id>
    <parentid>561</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T15:23:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="421" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>64172fc7ab88a9fbf3928e9e3af96fe3ce38b6be</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Test Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>163</id>
  <revision>
    <id>575</id>
    <parentid>574</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T15:25:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="520" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;!-- Real autostub will include stub category link(s) here --&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>55126b3e7e3a4a8ba96da7212457ba9f823a437f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>607</id>
    <parentid>606</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-29T15:41:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="559" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:300px"&gt;
{| style="width:300px"
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center;width=300px" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>416e83326f5bfed16cc7120a3970c2df146cda73</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>934</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T13:55:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>info</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="340" xml:space="preserve">NASA-008

Retired Dec. 17, 2004 

Used to launch the Pegasus orbital vehicle.  Also used to launch astronauts via the X-15 program.  Also used to launch lifting bodies. 

History:  [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html]

[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>1001cf2a299cfb5d1e4e451ee3dd8d946a12ebb4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>710</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T13:57:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>history</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="128" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French Diamant launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>6ea40df15646ee232fd346c817a149b1db657792</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>711</id>
    <parentid>710</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T13:57:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="132" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>6efb7fe96a057b71fca2a1e0fc7324bb4ccbdf10</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>712</id>
    <parentid>711</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-05T19:26:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="143" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

{{Stub}}


[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>d4721e2d389401042d63a88956d18859ae54bb6a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>700</id>
    <timestamp>2007-01-31T19:18:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.96.219.163</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Was at top of missing pages list</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="511" xml:space="preserve">The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]]]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]


[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>deae6310d12bfdf925213e97823f6fe009b80a2b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>779</id>
    <parentid>778</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-03T20:35:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.96.219.163</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1216" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>6bb0fb87e99c8074f638d033f72be58c5a959af9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>780</id>
    <parentid>779</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-03T20:36:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[NASA John Glenn Research Center]] moved to [[John Glenn Research Center]]: Name formatting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1216" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>6bb0fb87e99c8074f638d033f72be58c5a959af9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>781</id>
    <parentid>780</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-03T20:37:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added NASA category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1234" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Catecory:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>0ce0d6eaef67d087ba19fe45c42ce278f4faf70a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>782</id>
    <parentid>781</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-03T20:39:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>fixing fimble</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1234" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>5159a0c8faf1575dca66d33c1a4ffd44a750eb23</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>903</id>
    <parentid>902</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-04T17:06:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13574" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]</text>
    <sha1>68590ce19c089fb2b8d94eccba2f57b1cd891999</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>904</id>
    <parentid>903</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-04T17:06:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13609" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || One Launch Attempted; failure || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a2be345cd3a0e4d822501df75482e8641c7cc94e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Template:Unencyclopedic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>166</id>
  <revision>
    <id>587</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T21:10:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>another cleanup tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article may not have sufficiently encyclopedic formatting or tone.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or reworking ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e0db0c5934dccae079abeb3653ae0bc9ea5b20e8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>926</id>
    <parentid>925</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-06T22:06:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Geoffrey.landis</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added link to tether</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3061" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>70380bf84781f6391053640e5c74435086dc5ba7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>743</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-15T23:48:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>http://isdc.nss.org/2007/</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="82" xml:space="preserve">Dallas, Texas
May 24-28, 2007

http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>189fdb1ff132f50456dbda27397e62d2285940f5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070120154310|809">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1078</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-15T23:59:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="375" xml:space="preserve">
The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop 
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 

Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007 

Cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>2e2c75f5d8f65db10e7bbcb714bc6a2e45f95db6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>722</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T00:07:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>http://www.aeroconf.org/</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="77" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>71e789d3ee48e358773f60d01b585dd83b7d70ad</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>723</id>
    <parentid>722</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T06:08:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="89" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/


{{Stub}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>8bab88eedc44fbb68f76473aebf446449e2a042f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>724</id>
    <parentid>723</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-17T13:59:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>cosponsors</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="126" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

Cosponsored by [[IEEE]] and [[AIAA]]

{{Stub}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>b741849d7fce863e083fd63cc3355df1c4a273c2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>640</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T00:11:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>AIAA conference calendar</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="187" xml:space="preserve">The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>c68c7c9d2bf0cd6ba9dacaa8ca4cabb6f650cdb6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>744</id>
    <parentid>743</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T06:35:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added speakers and tags, link to main article that doesn't seem to exist yet</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="876" xml:space="preserve">The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] is being held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme is 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Pending}}
{{Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect.


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>5d19d42b67fb17a1afb237dc61b22b3e220e61ce</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Pending</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>143</id>
  <revision>
    <id>477</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T06:38:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>see if this makes it past the DIV filter</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is about a pending event, and the information here is prone to change or obsolescence.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Pending Events]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f970ac0aa0d0172188e297ddd401e29159dcc78d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>733</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-16T14:41:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>ISDC info</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="300" xml:space="preserve">The Annual gathering of the National Space Society, usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend.  Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have been in Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia.

[[International Space Development Conference 2007]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>e7e084596b19ca6e2ffc399c726a145fa9bdf8ae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1079</id>
    <parentid>1078</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-17T13:54:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>sponsor</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="428" xml:space="preserve">The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop 
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 

Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007 

Cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

Sponsor: [[Space Engineering and Science Institute]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>ff439765d24a818729a210d71294775b9ffc9245</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>768</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-17T14:05:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>info</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="223" xml:space="preserve">The larger of two government space research agencies in Japan.

Sponsors the [[SELENE]] lunar orbiter spacecraft as well as the [[H-IIA]] and [[H-IIB]] launch vehicles, and module for the [[International Space Station|ISS]]</text>
    <sha1>b815a727aead6fc11837996c8f2f660570a55db3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>769</id>
    <parentid>768</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-18T15:49:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>cats</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="272" xml:space="preserve">The larger of two government space research agencies in Japan.

Sponsors the [[SELENE]] lunar orbiter spacecraft as well as the [[H-IIA]] and [[H-IIB]] launch vehicles, and module for the [[International Space Station|ISS]]

[[Category:Organizations]]
[[Category:Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ba2840a8cfb12964a8c546a26210380509b59fda</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>935</id>
    <parentid>934</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-18T16:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="344" xml:space="preserve">NASA-008

Retired Dec. 17, 2004 

Used to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  Also used to launch astronauts via the X-15 program.  Also used to launch lifting bodies. 

History:  [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html]

[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>a1f6c59811961fa89b0d28cb74ed48d326319122</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>936</id>
    <parentid>935</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-09T12:35:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Bryce</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Added NASA-003 and its location and link. Added brief description of plane and manufacturer. Added "mothership".</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1304" xml:space="preserve">== NASA-003, NASA-008 ==

Two specially-modified Boeing B-52 heavy bombers, with eight jet engines in 4 clusters of two, two of these clusters slung beneath each wing. A special hanging "cradle" was added beneath the starboard wing, between the inboard engine cluster and the fuselage. Used to launch X-15 rocketplanes (some of whose pilots flew high enough to earn their astronaut wings), to launch lifting bodies, and to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  One of these aircraft, tail number NASA-003 (retired 1969), is on public display at the Pima Air &amp; Space Museum near Tucson, AZ. See: http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm [http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm Boeing NB-52A 'Stratofortress' SN: 52-0003].

NASA-008 first flew in 1955 June 11 and was retired on 2004 December 17. See:  http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html B-52B "Mothership" Launch Aircraft]

The "mothership" idea continues to be used, most recently by the winner of the X-Prize, SpaceShip One, and followup craft. There is also a rumored secret Air Force space plane project, commonly referred to as "Aurora", which may also use a "mothership" configuration (if it exists).

[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>30d8406e8d762e30a274afca7973f191331db327</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>937</id>
    <parentid>936</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-09T15:13:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Category:Boosters]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1326" xml:space="preserve">== NASA-003, NASA-008 ==

Two specially-modified Boeing B-52 heavy bombers, with eight jet engines in 4 clusters of two, two of these clusters slung beneath each wing. A special hanging "cradle" was added beneath the starboard wing, between the inboard engine cluster and the fuselage. Used to launch X-15 rocketplanes (some of whose pilots flew high enough to earn their astronaut wings), to launch lifting bodies, and to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  One of these aircraft, tail number NASA-003 (retired 1969), is on public display at the Pima Air &amp; Space Museum near Tucson, AZ. See: http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm [http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm Boeing NB-52A 'Stratofortress' SN: 52-0003].

NASA-008 first flew in 1955 June 11 and was retired on 2004 December 17. See:  http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html B-52B "Mothership" Launch Aircraft]

The "mothership" idea continues to be used, most recently by the winner of the X-Prize, SpaceShip One, and followup craft. There is also a rumored secret Air Force space plane project, commonly referred to as "Aurora", which may also use a "mothership" configuration (if it exists).

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Boosters]]</text>
    <sha1>590fb09a9a7b40f66797cf1fd3f590bb2b78b6c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>758</id>
    <parentid>757</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-18T20:04:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="558" xml:space="preserve">Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>ce63f27b28c42415ff07f4ff1925292a9dfe7d6e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>947</id>
    <parentid>946</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-18T20:05:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="496" xml:space="preserve">A SCRAMJet is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).

{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>a232d66802de8761c80db4baaf0a6c2f7dbbdbe8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>948</id>
    <parentid>947</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:02:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Taggeh with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="511" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
A SCRAMJet is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).

{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>6271c4b1cab9cfe9f38d04c6437de103d8c2ff69</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>844</id>
    <parentid>843</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-20T00:20:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  *[[Odyssey]] Floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1187" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] Floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>83a5486233b9ca60332d2be46a4c5658123890d5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>845</id>
    <parentid>844</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-20T00:20:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Licensed */  more</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1198" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] deep ocean floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a5cae85afd7246526ae4d88b9ec02c07b976bfa8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>846</id>
    <parentid>845</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:00:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1214" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] deep ocean floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>0275a7beb55afebcf66f9638d06fe67d78e1bab6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>817</id>
    <parentid>816</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-02-21T08:38:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>internal consistency; formatting is no longer part of what makes this less good an article than [[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]; removed cleanup tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1696" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*[[Energia]]/[[Buran]] - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999
*[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961
*[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975
*[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973 (see [[Apollo]])
*[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994
*[[Titan-IV]] -  October 19, 2005
*[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*[[Conestoga]]

===Europe/ELDO===
*[[Europa-II]]

===Russia/USSR ===
*[[N-1]]

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*[[Otrag]] 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*[[Dolphin]]
*[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) 
*[[Percheron]] 
*[[X-33]] 

==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
*[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>9e8644811b043f841f85e3d6f045f05b941485a0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Unknown Terms</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>168</id>
  <revision>
    <id>595</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-26T10:16:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tag for images whose terms for usage are unknown</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="503" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This terms under which this image is available for use are unknown.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} identifying]&lt;/span&gt; them or deleting or marking for deletion this image.'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unknown Term Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31ba2ec45aedff407dccea02ffc526f2bff23b66</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>247</id>
    <timestamp>2007-02-26T10:20:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for fair use images</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a74730666835d16d0d430de142dd0a88d491467a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>248</id>
    <parentid>247</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-21T14:02:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fixing incorrect categorization of tag (was putting tagged images in stub category)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Year box</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>247</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1360</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-03T20:15:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;br style="clear: both;" /&gt; {| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;" |- style="text-align: center;" | width="30%" ...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="389" xml:space="preserve">&lt;br style="clear: both;" /&gt;
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
| width="30%" |Previous Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{before}}}'''
| width="40%" style="text-align: center;" |'''The Year Of &lt;BR/&gt;{{{year}}}'''
| width="30%" |Following Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{after}}}'''
|}
&lt;br style="clear: both;" /&gt;</text>
    <sha1>18811c54532a4551d72eb01abae8c9dca028b19c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>648</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-07T18:00:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Autostub3</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="953" xml:space="preserve">{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''Ablating Material'''
 

[[/A&gt;|/A&gt;
]]A material, especially a coating material, designed to provide
thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of
mass.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry
vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the
transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures
within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing
in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The
heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid
or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective
heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as
[[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. ''  

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category%3ADefinitions]]
[[Category%3ANASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>2be8d4e5d5617e8d6a3a5a72982f9e28f3c35bc9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>649</id>
    <parentid>648</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-08T18:41:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision(s)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="953" xml:space="preserve">{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''Ablating Material'''
 

[[/A&gt;|/A&gt;
]]A material, especially a coating material, designed to provide
thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of
mass.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry
vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the
transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures
within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing
in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The
heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid
or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective
heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as
[[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. ''  

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category%3ADefinitions]]
[[Category%3ANASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>2be8d4e5d5617e8d6a3a5a72982f9e28f3c35bc9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>650</id>
    <parentid>649</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-20T21:46:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reformatted text away from dictionary format; changed stub tag; removed definition categorization; adedd categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="957" xml:space="preserve">{{Stub}}

An '''Ablating Material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>f3d1e170b2b9e4a043febe849c294819322e32a6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>651</id>
    <parentid>650</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-20T22:32:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>sorting into new stub categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="965" xml:space="preserve">{{Physics Stub}}

An '''Ablating Material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>88dc48fe64eb66d047454aa0af5906ccae63ef41</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>661</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-07T18:00:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Autostub3</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="969" xml:space="preserve">{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac'''
 
&lt;BR/&gt;An annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category%3ADefinitions]]
[[Category%3ANASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>e416c4cef4d6c3d607d9621ff959c8ef716d139e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>662</id>
    <parentid>661</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-08T18:48:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision(s)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="969" xml:space="preserve">{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac'''
 
&lt;BR/&gt;An annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category%3ADefinitions]]
[[Category%3ANASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>e416c4cef4d6c3d607d9621ff959c8ef716d139e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Initial Proof Needed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>113</id>
  <revision>
    <id>337</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-07T19:14:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Initial Proof Needed template for Autostub3</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This autostub has not yet had its initial copyediting proof.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Initial Proof Needed]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5c8a2083b9d269504dee973c943062c13efb283a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>156</id>
    <parentid>155</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-07T19:21:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>making more compact</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="542" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;D*I*V style="pad*ding:4p*t;li*ne-he*ight:1.*25e*m;back*ground:#EFEFEF;f*ont-siz*e:8*pt;"&gt; --&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;!-- &lt;/DIV&gt; --&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a138e6e142def6691dc0cf1f63e6ad8f2c4b3b53</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>157</id>
    <parentid>156</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-20T22:23:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>restored previous DIV formatting; changed the tagging categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="592" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; was used while a protection mechanism made this tag otherwise uneditable --&gt;
&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Autostubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>00f51efb2c0d652cef59cf1f71f3cd6839dd1dbf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>526</id>
    <parentid>525</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-07T19:21:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>making more compact and eliminating right end underreach issue</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fce308332aac7aefe379e3799203b320cca73382</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Reference Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>149</id>
  <revision>
    <id>503</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-08T23:24:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub and using pre-broken DIV settings</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="505" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This [[:Category:References|reference]] article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>82363f6b75f2375808357cbd9b476dae6965b91f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Physics Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>144</id>
  <revision>
    <id>481</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-20T22:31:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="378" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>94024e26879737afdd69f7530bc958220853b4f5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>482</id>
    <parentid>481</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-20T23:50:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>border; giving up on dynamic width for now</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="459" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:2px;overflow:auto;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f891c56dce41dd3deab5ab68124eb32a71f55807</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1384</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-24T05:26:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MediaWiki default</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">&lt;big&gt;'''MediaWiki has been successfully installed.'''&lt;/big&gt;

Consult the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.

== Getting started ==

* [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]</text>
    <sha1>928e1deea259c70afc3513c66f29f3fcd740d8bf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1385</id>
    <parentid>1384</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-24T06:26:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Lunarpedia main page with more than just the serial numbers filed off</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2541" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Lunarpedia!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for [http://lunarpedia Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia Marspedia], and [http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.</text>
    <sha1>6b0050957436e2547ddf022f1a848a5948bf7114</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1386</id>
    <parentid>1385</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-24T06:27:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>fixed name</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2544" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for [http://lunarpedia Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia Marspedia], and [http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.</text>
    <sha1>49e5f3683526d47a3120af83b05342ac8d56ce7b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1387</id>
    <parentid>1386</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-25T03:01:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2562" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.</text>
    <sha1>257fa9b2ba607e845f1e4af9ac411c2f04809a86</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1388</id>
    <parentid>1387</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-25T03:02:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2570" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.</text>
    <sha1>5744726d7ad266c8b68cd0e6f72b7581bb9da57e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>905</id>
    <parentid>904</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-24T14:57:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* United States */  Falcon update</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13618" xml:space="preserve">*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>6352d82681c4cecdb6851def8794ae9599ab6dfd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>906</id>
    <parentid>905</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T04:57:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13633" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
*This is where the Launch System Vendor and Booster lists have been merged. 

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>eec132cd54f266739fe2cc7d7f60fa07a61259b6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Controversial</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>80</id>
  <revision>
    <id>193</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T06:15:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBFAF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by helping to r...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="460" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBFAF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by helping to resolve the issue in this article's &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversies]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>740a63c2dbf2783b327bde1b5b07218861fe6fed</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Move2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>134</id>
  <revision>
    <id>437</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T06:25:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tag for articles to move to Scientifiction once interwiki is finally set up</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Scientifiction]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0ddd0c83ac6300dcbfbc394e98335818c9909b51</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Move2marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>133</id>
  <revision>
    <id>432</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T06:28:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tag for articles to move to Marspedia once interwiki is set up</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="336" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#7F0000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Marspedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Marspedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>25a58616b349b86a6674e5018c79fe9cf8d04b21</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Move2lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>132</id>
  <revision>
    <id>427</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T06:39:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for articles to move here (or have been moved here from another wiki)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="338" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#3F3F3F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Lunarpedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Lunarpedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>25f90b4262a89dd388977186a7817accb45a40ab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Move2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>135</id>
  <revision>
    <id>442</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T06:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for articles to move to the general space wiki when interwiki is set up</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="355" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to the general space wiki.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to General Space]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a8293e324ef68295e22acf3c86cb0dff89c1c39f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070216000717|722">
  <title>Template:Move2exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>131</id>
  <revision>
    <id>421</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-28T07:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag template for articles needing to be moved to ExoDictionary once interwiki is set up</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="347" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>54aae0b623c47e7692f42d8d93bf1752be94c9a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1101</id>
    <parentid>1100</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1490" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]].

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]

==External Links== 

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>ecf65c2984339e2ec589f73a3166e87a4273d12d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>759</id>
    <parentid>758</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:05:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="574" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>35f3b043863d9245e417d5ff83604510d9736d56</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>927</id>
    <parentid>926</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:06:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3076" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>927259b5287d4086ec35910f552aeef81f5a134c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>686</id>
    <parentid>685</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T05:16:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>tagged with Move2space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="980" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
Founded in 1933, the ''British Interplanetary Society'' (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight.  Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership.  It publishes a technical journal, ''Journal of British Interplanetary Society'', a monthly general interest magazine, ''Spaceflight'', a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, ''Space Chronicle'', and a magazine for children, ''Voyage''.  Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930.  It still exists in the form of the  [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]], following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences.

&lt;BR&gt;
{{Stub}}
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;
==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>e97d05c3ef68fc011534c08a615745778cfe24b1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>770</id>
    <parentid>769</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-29T06:24:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added Move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="287" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
The larger of two government space research agencies in Japan.

Sponsors the [[SELENE]] lunar orbiter spacecraft as well as the [[H-IIA]] and [[H-IIB]] launch vehicles, and module for the [[International Space Station|ISS]]

[[Category:Organizations]]
[[Category:Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>3cd657459ac7b9a30954935b53ed15c7007d554c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Subminimal</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>162</id>
  <revision>
    <id>570</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:22:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for subminimal and empty stub articles</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="466" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:5pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article has no or virtually no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} adding]&lt;/span&gt; something to it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Subminimal Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>03351211529163865b119242c00d5e868372c8b2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>158</id>
    <parentid>157</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:28:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>width fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="654" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; was used while a protection mechanism made this tag otherwise uneditable --&gt;
{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Autostubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a0cc01e9050896292a509cd5b1ecac0bd0d02327</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Controversial</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>80</id>
  <revision>
    <id>194</id>
    <parentid>193</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:30:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization and width fixes; tinkered on color</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by helping to resolve the issue in this article's &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversies]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a253de8c344f4e93cbfc7913fc8a7a888f0976a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Move2exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>131</id>
  <revision>
    <id>422</id>
    <parentid>421</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:31:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="319" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f5331008328435c1396334aa83d7e45764bc0cb8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>423</id>
    <parentid>422</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:33:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added [[:Category:Interwiki Tasks]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="348" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Interwiki Tasks]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9a614c3a9d7783a4602cb202c42d37ad84a71694</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>424</id>
    <parentid>423</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:39:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="319" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f5331008328435c1396334aa83d7e45764bc0cb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Move2lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>132</id>
  <revision>
    <id>428</id>
    <parentid>427</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:34:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="339" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#3F3F3F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Lunarpedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Lunarpedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Interwiki Tasks]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0e16c27bf23287448896a155323b3bc8989165fb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>429</id>
    <parentid>428</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:39:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="310" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#3F3F3F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Lunarpedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Lunarpedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>181c4b459d2944dee02c8ad499ba3ad44954c5fa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Move2marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>133</id>
  <revision>
    <id>433</id>
    <parentid>432</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:35:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#7F0000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Marspedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Marspedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Interwiki Tasks]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4568ec61e043b30e481bf997c6e377e0c182d5e3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>434</id>
    <parentid>433</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:38:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="308" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#7F0000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Marspedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Marspedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f661fdd6e7b63655f9fd30f7de009f6299e1bb40</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Move2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>134</id>
  <revision>
    <id>438</id>
    <parentid>437</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:36:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="351" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Scientifiction]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Interwiki Tasks]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2e545b887555aa9add2b5b21f15fe308c487ae38</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>439</id>
    <parentid>438</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:38:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="322" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Scientifiction]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0e786f9d8a1823f83c0ca2eee73f6cdadd174fb3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Move2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>135</id>
  <revision>
    <id>443</id>
    <parentid>442</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:37:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="327" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to the general space wiki.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to General Space]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0819d920d73a77f2c81e0a1b23b12a2f7f800486</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Physics Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>144</id>
  <revision>
    <id>483</id>
    <parentid>482</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:40:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>width fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="440" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7e911aaa01a5833830dd5be57eaf40b894e0e47d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Reference Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>149</id>
  <revision>
    <id>504</id>
    <parentid>503</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:41:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>width fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="567" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This [[:Category:References|reference]] article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f228c594a79ea28e3840f52d036a73bcaa436a9d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>563</id>
    <parentid>562</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:46:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>width fix and font tweak; added plea for stub sorting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="486" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct stub subcategory.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>08f478fb139d3fd52eaed1605de2494932eeebe2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Ref Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>148</id>
  <revision>
    <id>499</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:54:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>I thought I'd already created stub categories.  Where did they go?</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a reference stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Reference Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>71904c7d0e77f988b696970bc30914e350a29568</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Life Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>122</id>
  <revision>
    <id>378</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:55:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>life support stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a life support stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Life Support Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50156f60fa2cdd13b68d068b440e7b2e125a2cfb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Business Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>75</id>
  <revision>
    <id>172</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T07:57:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>business stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="439" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a business stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Business Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0622437d8894500feefe03f9b4f6c586ae2d88f5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Chem Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>76</id>
  <revision>
    <id>176</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:00:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>chemistry stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="441" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a chemistry stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Chemistry Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b6f134f221081c44831ef95a6120fa2e8394aa20</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Help Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>108</id>
  <revision>
    <id>316</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:02:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub help</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="431" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a help stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Help Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41d3bcccee0c976cd5898fc05dfffa0d1f9d6529</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Hist Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>109</id>
  <revision>
    <id>320</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:03:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>this stub is history</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="440" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a history stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ec8f4be8650eebf520606c1cfdcfd92a3f4bcb4f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Dev Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>83</id>
  <revision>
    <id>207</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:04:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stubs for development</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a development stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Development Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5d1ba93aacf628b21ada2c0dbcd58daf605eca6d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Trans Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>164</id>
  <revision>
    <id>579</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:05:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub tag for transportation</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a transportation stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>80a980acd4d149b0044d258bfd815dd9516fbbfb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Infra Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>112</id>
  <revision>
    <id>333</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:07:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Infrastub</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an infrastructure stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Infrastructural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a445e4591e0d1297150b464419ba4f3f3dcc170e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Org Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>140</id>
  <revision>
    <id>464</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:25:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub organization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an organizational stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Organizational Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>45d8878ba0e20739130809d482b1c56f75d2726e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Biog Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>73</id>
  <revision>
    <id>162</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:30:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Stub Biographies</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a biographical stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41db9aa30993c6b179096a866406e4128b86dce9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Settle Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>156</id>
  <revision>
    <id>533</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:33:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>settling stub</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="443" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a settlement stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Settlement Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7d35cd9444aa176a5d690bee49e2cc658f867da4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Selene Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>155</id>
  <revision>
    <id>529</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:35:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Selenologically stubbed</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenological stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenological Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cf5a34e8280e412fc669c208805f59ad6fcb2c43</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Agri Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>71</id>
  <revision>
    <id>147</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:36:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Stubby Agriculture</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an Agricultural stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Agricultural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e706929e64b5525c70938ceb12bb1940feb14de6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Maint Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>125</id>
  <revision>
    <id>394</id>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T08:37:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>maintaining stubs</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a site maintenance stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Maintenance Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>be682a09a09f7f54ad3b1ea3973493b5b06d3b36</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1389</id>
    <parentid>1388</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-03-31T19:09:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>added import progress table</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3757" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importation initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.</text>
    <sha1>c11f5988b40c83c95185753dde64a777056449fd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1390</id>
    <parentid>1389</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-02T07:50:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Software Capabilities */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="4992" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importation initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Exodictionary and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and Marspedia
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>82b186e196842c5c65ce21e3bb63b6dcfbd534e7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1391</id>
    <parentid>1390</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-02T12:55:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>updating chart</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5000" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importation initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|~
|~
|~
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Exodictionary and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and Marspedia
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>89027f379fa3d27be3d853a0d6055045cd45fa6e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>725</id>
    <parentid>724</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-02T13:45:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting (subminimal)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="132" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

Cosponsored by [[IEEE]] and [[AIAA]]

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>da422a999c186227a27684cb6e3f0cf2fb475e49</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>713</id>
    <parentid>712</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-02T13:46:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting (subminimal)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="149" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>1bc110786856c8fe5757116148b6704366f0c296</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>641</id>
    <parentid>640</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-02T13:56:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added Subminimal tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="203" xml:space="preserve">The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>ee0b0c436eaff1e4d24d7df74c7f85c14124a8df</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Expand</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>88</id>
  <revision>
    <id>235</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-03T21:41:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;" |&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete and needs mo...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="470" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete and needs more information.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct stub subcategory.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2c4d9c65090808ca237e6c1fb9d941c6ae04809e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>236</id>
    <parentid>235</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-03T21:45:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete and needs more information.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>731f0120acc8a8459e35f3b4cd49f1d29a749cce</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>237</id>
    <parentid>236</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-03T22:57:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete or needs more information.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>82c48d9156f5824a8540976091a580caeed11300</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>238</id>
    <parentid>237</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T07:06:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete or needs more information.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0771dfa415192375ca082916d2e4776bbbbd90d5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Expandsec</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>89</id>
  <revision>
    <id>242</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-03T21:48:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;" |&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomple...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomplete or needs more detail.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b5af865fc66a65d9d766a382988ab0b9bddcd461</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>Template:Historical Essay</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>110</id>
  <revision>
    <id>324</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-04T17:38:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>This tag needs more work</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="582" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"&gt; 
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"
|[[Image:Apollo_09_David_Scott_podczas_lotu_Apollo_9_GPN-2000-001100.jpg|100px]]
|&lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a [[Oral_Histories_List|Historical Essay]]&lt;BR/&gt; Written and submitted by&lt;BR/&gt; {{{Author}}}.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}


&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Documents]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Essay Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>66371b303c31b3b3aa9f951fde966ea5410fdc8f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>325</id>
    <parentid>324</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-04T17:51:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>recategorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="610" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"&gt; 
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"
|[[Image:Apollo_09_David_Scott_podczas_lotu_Apollo_9_GPN-2000-001100.jpg|100px]]
|&lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a [[Oral_Histories_List|Historical Essay]]&lt;BR/&gt; Written and submitted by&lt;BR/&gt; {{{Author}}}.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}


&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Essays]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Essay Templates]]
[[Category:History Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41545287697e690a56dd9b68768f72466a18e3e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070329050350|1101">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>701</id>
    <parentid>700</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-05T00:06:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="509" xml:space="preserve">The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]


[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>d98b42a7d38cba9f98a9b322641ef8dfe2e76f1b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Expandsec</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>89</id>
  <revision>
    <id>243</id>
    <parentid>242</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T07:08:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="473" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomplete or needs more detail.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand Section]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c0a8621c0ae3475a2f9869faf7d2cc4d26454afd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Category:Lunarpedia userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>44</id>
  <revision>
    <id>83</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T14:54:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;!--Categories--&gt; [[Category:User namespace templates|Userboxes]] [[Category:Lunarpedia Userboxes]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="99" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:User namespace templates|Userboxes]]
[[Category:Lunarpedia Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>4ea1c56310c5c8e53cee0cf31be9e1c4a5f1c01b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>84</id>
    <parentid>83</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:38:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>14bada5678b06c73ff8693185e7e490c1c31ef7c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>98</id>
  <revision>
    <id>276</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T16:08:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 1px; margin: 1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 85%; background: #f6f6f6" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #fff; text-align:...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="607" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 1px; margin: 1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 85%; background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|42px]]
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, this user has [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single page]] on '''[[Lunarpedia|Lunarpedia.org]]'''.  Click [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b07378d9e52c467b99a5731ce5450624357ad50c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>277</id>
    <parentid>276</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:25:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="707" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3901efcd588c1e4d0ed079c826ed91cfc6cbb952</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>99</id>
  <revision>
    <id>280</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T16:20:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 1px; margin: 1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 85%; background: #f6f6f6" | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #fff; text-align:...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="627" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 1px; margin: 1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 85%; background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|42px]]
| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, this user has [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single talk page]] on '''[[Lunarpedia|Lunarpedia.org]]'''.  Click [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's talk page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c9e0a04f5f778f981af243b021d69d0cbb3574d0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>281</id>
    <parentid>280</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:26:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="723" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cb208176a4ef007d845bae2baf5cdfa37865f35f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Debate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>82</id>
  <revision>
    <id>203</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:17:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tag for debates so that they don't get mixed in with wiki level controversies, which are much less fun</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="481" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is an  topic of debate. &lt;BR/&gt; Please feel free to  &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} jump in]&lt;/span&gt; with a constructive contribution.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fbcf257649fa8540758f4b277f3ba01a34460dc1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>204</id>
    <parentid>203</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-07T13:37:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>typo</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a topic of debate. &lt;BR/&gt; Please feel free to  &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} jump in]&lt;/span&gt; with a constructive contribution.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>04d956935778f91a2877011bebd18fa6817381e6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>100</id>
  <revision>
    <id>284</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:32:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="703" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>09dbfa041064db2c02980be8c8598aa487c8b195</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>285</id>
    <parentid>284</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:36:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="702" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cf9c333884370fd7bbb9ffe49af5778e09fb8c08</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>101</id>
  <revision>
    <id>288</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T19:36:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="718" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6010b87cd480d7e8381ba5474a09f8ab22765624</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>94</id>
  <revision>
    <id>262</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T20:16:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="710" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95cd78fb2d29b39017341c1614babd0983f90603</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>95</id>
  <revision>
    <id>265</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-06T20:21:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>47e9eee7f978eff1cb587f64cc64a6d3a80ddfdb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1392</id>
    <parentid>1391</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-07T01:47:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>68.48.10.120</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt; */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5001" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|~
|~
|~
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Exodictionary and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and Marspedia
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>cf3d360ebe8be96959216444ddc4c4999fb81433</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1393</id>
    <parentid>1392</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T19:04:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5040" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
{{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|~
|~
|~
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Exodictionary and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and Marspedia
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>e488ce2a2a192e797f00e01894f23953c140ccc1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>102</id>
  <revision>
    <id>291</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-07T10:44:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="710" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95cd78fb2d29b39017341c1614babd0983f90603</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>292</id>
    <parentid>291</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T02:02:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="711" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ffb8c361f57c42a488093eaec6aab0b701f4afad</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>103</id>
  <revision>
    <id>295</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-07T10:46:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>47e9eee7f978eff1cb587f64cc64a6d3a80ddfdb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>296</id>
    <parentid>295</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T02:03:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5fec2070785c1274d33204d3ad03fb826b8d03d6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>224</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1249</id>
    <parentid>1248</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:15:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:User Sysop]] moved to [[Template:User Lunarp Sysop]]: We need to be able to add similar templates for the other wikis this naming convention permits that.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c4b356489432d59bbbb95143462f91aa12ff6f3c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1250</id>
    <parentid>1249</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:56:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="423" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d1e5633d4f4ff51a600cb3904e9a7b006fe266c9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>243</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1343</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:15:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:User Sysop]] moved to [[Template:User Lunarp Sysop]]: We need to be able to add similar templates for the other wikis this naming convention permits that.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Lunarp Sysop]]</text>
    <sha1>cf49fa7ae0d49aa998bb5b19a0ddd9857292453b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Exd Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>221</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1237</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:18:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="357" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>392ed8dd889d2c8445cdb36e09340ff840605360</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1238</id>
    <parentid>1237</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:54:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>257610b18c87c4c53e9c066e1b002bd02874e14d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Marsp Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>227</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1258</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:19:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="348" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3e9275096d331757bbfcdb365d3675700b268ff3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1259</id>
    <parentid>1258</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:57:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="422" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>73ca549571cf2ec0589fba99d4a8e43da7a156f7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Sf Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>241</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1338</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:21:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="358" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ec27b30f0f033a62019b60f1c25b3269dd893cf5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>223</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1243</id>
    <parentid>1242</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:35:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:User Server Admin]] moved to [[Template:User Lunarp Server Admin]]: New naming convention to allow user templates for the other wikis</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="378" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0419996a8525e08661d20b701c2d3e2dbf684612</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1244</id>
    <parentid>1243</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:37:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4b7363932a1f92d3e98219297a1647feb036e5d5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1245</id>
    <parentid>1244</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:42:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="365" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b57f3d6cbf149c9a57bc0afc38b6dc6cd24b35d6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1246</id>
    <parentid>1245</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:55:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="425" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d5a3fe48301642407ff6dbdb00f5a67e4ff70f98</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>239</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1333</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:35:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:User Server Admin]] moved to [[Template:User Lunarp Server Admin]]: New naming convention to allow user templates for the other wikis</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="47" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Lunarp Server Admin]]</text>
    <sha1>8cf4622c1c6f6a0c4fd587ed8f67c54da8c0de25</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Exd Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>220</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1234</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:38:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="372" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>eb5a4113757e5ec0a97ba06e5e6817f1732404e9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1235</id>
    <parentid>1234</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:53:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>be2b56af1a6d5443d3c577a93c142f37720b6ef8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Sf Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>240</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1335</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:39:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="373" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>753529a263cf823846f2df0b89f9d1fd796a0cae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Marsp Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>226</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1255</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T01:41:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4b7363932a1f92d3e98219297a1647feb036e5d5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1256</id>
    <parentid>1255</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:56:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="437" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>889dbf03b26ba92d1b67491d8026360663a4871c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User 1 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>212</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1202</id>
    <parentid>1201</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:49:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_1.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8c0386b0160109312e3db4ffbdaa01917259b2ba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User 2 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>213</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1207</id>
    <parentid>1206</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:50:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="462" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_2.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''TWO DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8bf28d112002265c1332a2f1a4b12b92bad371b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User 3 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>214</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1213</id>
    <parentid>1212</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:50:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_3.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c2dafe779dd300f36e0cb571810992ee664a50b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User ASI Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>217</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1224</id>
    <parentid>1223</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:51:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|ASI.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9c2f2b9fc9cb21cf399088efd56a9ae589e6005a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User ASI Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>218</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1230</id>
    <parentid>1229</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:51:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|ASI.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f77e289d9ad43e3204d9b6b09d703bc29d4687db</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>219</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1232</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:52:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:User Director]] moved to [[Template:User Moonsociety Director]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="48" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Moonsociety Director]]</text>
    <sha1>92f20fab2c1f86dc3fc5ea9387a4a8923640c258</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>229</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1268</id>
    <parentid>1267</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:52:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:User Director]] moved to [[Template:User Moonsociety Director]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f67d4b0345ccc324cf1c9519f292498c09c023a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1269</id>
    <parentid>1268</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:53:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="466" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Moonsociety.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d41ebaffbeffb2ddaea710873636695babe2c5ae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>222</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1240</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:55:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:User List Master]] moved to [[Template:User Moonsociety List Master]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="51" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Moonsociety List Master]]</text>
    <sha1>c55afdefc46e6c1cb9ffe850e80f1e25059bdc14</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>230</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1273</id>
    <parentid>1272</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:55:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:User List Master]] moved to [[Template:User Moonsociety List Master]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="392" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is current list-master for the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2cd48e657815790d143c5b2fa07096c44e4edc78</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1274</id>
    <parentid>1273</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T03:55:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is current list-master for the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Moonsociety.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3c7cf0bfdb8f5c22b793d47da563f7cd7189e52b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070406070818|243">
  <title>Template:ServerProbs</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>210</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1189</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T18:52:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| width=85% align=center cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px;" |- |align="center"| '''We are currently suffering from some interm...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="359" xml:space="preserve">{| width=85% align=center cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px;"
|-
|align="center"|
'''We are currently suffering from some intermittent outages. For more information see [http://www.dreamhoststatus.com/ DreamHost Status] and keep in mind that, in some cases, a "Resolved" tag might not mean fixed.
|}</text>
    <sha1>e327771b9709dd30c8ce08abcc618502f117abdb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1394</id>
    <parentid>1393</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T21:39:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Interwiki */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5275" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
{{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|~
|~
|~
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>0c7f9f98b459dcb5bf9405d1362d30c6ddb517e3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1395</id>
    <parentid>1394</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-09T02:06:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5284" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|~
|~
|~
|~
|~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>a90a8f25fe3280320ae0b3148e19b29a380d7879</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1396</id>
    <parentid>1395</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-09T17:52:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>updating progress chart</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5294" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|style="background:#000000;color:#000000;font-weight:bold" |_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>32e7d40d5c06383f4f623375456638c2900cf9ef</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1397</id>
    <parentid>1396</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-10T01:28:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Collected H-Z</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5191" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>124216b73ef92c098d4afca5ae77bae5367cfd21</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1398</id>
    <parentid>1397</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-15T12:08:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Protected "[[Main Page]]" [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5191" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is in progress.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>124216b73ef92c098d4afca5ae77bae5367cfd21</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1399</id>
    <parentid>1398</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-03T06:09:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Completion of importation of initial content (finally!)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5276" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the upcoming general space wiki.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is &lt;STRIKE&gt;in progress&lt;/STRIKE&gt; completed.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>b8eeabaa5634af33ee6c928d03acbcb0f803b0da</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:User Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>245</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1354</id>
    <parentid>1353</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T22:15:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revision(s)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px green solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #07BF07; text-align: center; color: black;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''V'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Vegetarian'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b2a3de7560877127dbf73d2cdf5bf6634e85652f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1355</id>
    <parentid>1354</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T22:17:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:Userbox Vegetarian]] moved to [[Template:User Vegetarian]]: Converting to local naming convention</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="436" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px green solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #07BF07; text-align: center; color: black;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''V'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Vegetarian'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b2a3de7560877127dbf73d2cdf5bf6634e85652f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Userbox Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>246</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1358</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T22:17:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:Userbox Vegetarian]] moved to [[Template:User Vegetarian]]: Converting to local naming convention</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Vegetarian]]</text>
    <sha1>838071f04af8794d927d719c975c53d5f9f29c38</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:PD notice</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>142</id>
  <revision>
    <id>473</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T23:18:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="color:#000000; border:solid 1px #A8A8A8; padding:0.5em 1em 0.5em 0.7em; margin:0.5em 0em; background-color:#FFFFFF;font-size:90%; vertical-align:middle;"&gt; [[Image:PD-icon.svg|2...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="439" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="color:#000000; border:solid 1px #A8A8A8; padding:0.5em 1em 0.5em 0.7em; margin:0.5em 0em; background-color:#FFFFFF;font-size:90%; vertical-align:middle;"&gt;
[[Image:PD-icon.svg|20px|left]]'''Important note:''' When you edit this text, you agree to release your contribution in the [[w:Public domain|public domain]]. If you don't want this, please don't edit. 
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:License templates|PD notice]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5064a5e6325b456b5c441a702871f86c91c8d011</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>474</id>
    <parentid>473</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-08T23:28:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="color:#000000; border:solid 1px #A8A8A8; padding:0.5em 1em 0.5em 0.7em; margin:0.5em 0em; background-color:#FFFFFF;font-size:90%; vertical-align:middle;"&gt;
[[Image:PD-icon.svg|20px|left]]'''Important note:''' When you edit this text, you agree to release your contribution in the public domain&lt;!-- [[w:Public domain|public domain]] --&gt;. If you don't want this, please don't edit. 
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:License templates|PD notice]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d28c2ed6ddd9909eb5cf6727218e4ec00ca406e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>249</id>
    <parentid>248</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-09T05:19:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:Fair Use Image]] moved to [[Template:Fair use]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Fair Use Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>202</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1136</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-09T05:19:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[Template:Fair Use Image]] moved to [[Template:Fair use]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:Fair use]]</text>
    <sha1>7f8d53ba82e864f76c83cae32738f37d730a9425</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1102</id>
    <parentid>1101</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-16T12:56:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* External Links */  NPR sotry</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1679" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]].

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

==External Links== 

&lt;/references&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>3be23152b326c846964368efdcf1baf0075a7efb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1103</id>
    <parentid>1102</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-16T12:56:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1679" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]].

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>84643287bbbbded20e43cd11316ac2ae1df746d1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1104</id>
    <parentid>1103</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-16T12:57:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>move link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1676" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>83aa38a80e5fd6a83e87b8b2864be67954719e7d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1105</id>
    <parentid>1104</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-24T03:36:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1683" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]


{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>9f1e3a00abd2352ee414203f1422df09cf1ee208</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Bootstrap</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>74</id>
  <revision>
    <id>166</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-17T04:58:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tag for bootstrap lists</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="552" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Bootstrap lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2bff8a84c54d515ce36a3f42c68f61232f6085e6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>167</id>
    <parentid>166</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-17T05:24:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>why is includeonly not working?</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="553" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Bootstrap lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9b950d02393d215c31abf62621de3b7ae2610acf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>168</id>
    <parentid>167</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-17T05:25:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Doh.  That's why it's not working...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="562" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Bootstrap lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b374207ac3126a20d03569066b7f48ecb2e8da00</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>687</id>
    <parentid>686</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-19T20:24:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>sorted Org Stub</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="984" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
Founded in 1933, the ''British Interplanetary Society'' (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight.  Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership.  It publishes a technical journal, ''Journal of British Interplanetary Society'', a monthly general interest magazine, ''Spaceflight'', a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, ''Space Chronicle'', and a magazine for children, ''Voyage''.  Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930.  It still exists in the form of the  [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]], following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences.

&lt;BR&gt;
{{Org Stub}}
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;
==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>45ca27c73c8d2a0d36aa8efe0bb6989c8c72606f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Space Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>158</id>
  <revision>
    <id>550</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-19T20:36:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a space stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a9d633abb3c8e8e07c7ad4029dfeb71f5fcd58a8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Inst Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>114</id>
  <revision>
    <id>340</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T09:56:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>institutional stub</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an institutional stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Business Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bc2c503da7405e5688ca849e7009c47e5aee23e3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>341</id>
    <parentid>340</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T09:59:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an institutional stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Institution Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a0ab7666d1c139efe9cdc59c3f57e96a7fee532c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>783</id>
    <parentid>782</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T09:58:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1239" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{Inst Stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>446fd39a7ca50affa7dfa08db1272e916f50eeb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>702</id>
    <parentid>701</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T10:02:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting; categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="542" xml:space="preserve">The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Inst Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>756f4fad0e0ef3c672031b0c54275db0e75f2e0c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>564</id>
    <parentid>563</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T10:04:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>creating Stubs to be Sorted categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="499" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct stub subcategory.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>39d2e80a14eb0519b7c277749f92debe5a9f478f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>675</id>
    <parentid>674</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-23T10:05:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stub sorting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="664" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Business Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>8d470795ed205ef50a8a15c407581940e46489bd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>652</id>
    <parentid>651</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-24T02:06:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Dstorrs</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1453" xml:space="preserve">{{Physics Stub}}

An '''Ablating Material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

It should be noted that use of ablating material for heat shields has two significant drawbacks:  first, the mass of the material must either be carried throughout the mission (at an attendant penalty to payload capacity) or must be installed immediately before reentry (adding greatly to complexity and raising safety concerns if, for whatever reason, the installation fails) and, second, the coating is a single-use component, making it unattractive as an option on reusable vehicles.

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>a65a802f1d887cd486fb60505e9e563ad30065b1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Launch Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>116</id>
  <revision>
    <id>351</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-24T02:55:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>launch system stub category tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a launch system stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Launch System Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e705e54addbb6d2d6b835e0ba6a3bba610edcd9b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>949</id>
    <parentid>948</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-24T03:42:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>stub sorting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="524" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).

{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>33ca138c98210bbce1e1e2a2209b7229c024f8f6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>663</id>
    <parentid>662</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-26T22:09:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>this may be a usefularticle stub; tagging to move to general space</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="956" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}

{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac'''
 
&lt;BR/&gt;An annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category:NASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>ede1c9bfd6a6f3f5e7000798b594039790dd0e93</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:User Past Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>238</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1325</id>
    <parentid>1324</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-27T23:33:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>216.129.98.144</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="17500" xml:space="preserve">[http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1116 free free ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=wolena clonazepam online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1127 free verizon ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031b3.htm generic viagra] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=cnaorboc ambien online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=342 free nextel ringtones] [http://elllimacc87.blogspot.com lexapro and valium] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=131 ambien online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=368 buy wellbutrin] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=getboctroc buy wellbutrin] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=pasletosit free tracfone ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=rolouacel mp3 ringtones] [http://basacelta.blogdiario.com/ free real ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=escaffey phentermine] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=pijasper soma online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/CoyarCharline/vuzo.htm generic diazepam] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=tevaith cheap norco] [http://bocvidom.jubiiblog.de/ fioricet online] [http://eltaget.jubiiblog.de/ cingular ringtones] [http://sitbasel.jubiiblog.de/ real ringtones] [http://nodelolo.jubiiblog.de/ albuterol online] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=darerla polyphonic ringtones] [http://caviou.jubiiblog.de/ cheap prozac] [http://rolvidel.jubiiblog.de/ cheap cialis] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=315 online ambien] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1102 celexa online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1093 cheap propecia] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=149 free samsung ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832223) free motorola ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1118 funny ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832245) sprint ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=150 sprint ringtones] [http://cocoleto.blogdiario.com/ cheap phentermine] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$97 free ringtones] [http://trrelvar.blogdiario.com/ kyocera ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1114 buy zyban] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=158 mono ringtones] [http://discussions.csbsju.edu/general/messages/25/gulel-233.html ultram online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1088 online xenical] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/AngelKristofer/veco.htm free real ringtones] [http://chibovi.blogdiario.com/ cheap xenical] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=chitrel cingular ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=331 kyocera ringtones] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$122 sonyericsson ringtones] [http://handspunyarns.blogspot.com valium overdose] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832209) ericsson ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=326 but fioricet] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$116 soma] [http://liricbo.blogdiario.com/ cheap wellbutrin] [http://carolli.blogdiario.com/ cheap fioricet] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1089 cheap wellbutrin] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=olositbo free sharp ringtones] [http://leeticarus.blogspot.com what does valium do] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=341 buy nexium] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1138 free midi ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=156 free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031c4.htm cheap paxil] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832221) midi ringtones] [http://sand-stars.blogspot.com valium sale] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1086 ambien online] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$124 sprint ringtones] [http://orladron.jubiiblog.de/ adipex online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=316 cheap ativan] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1091 nexium online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/AngelKristofer/zyxuwu.htm sagem ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832199) ativan online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=336 mono ringtones] [http://delricc.blogdiario.com/ lorazepam online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=327 free ringtones] [http://taroelt.jubiiblog.de/ free mono ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=147 real ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031b2.htm generic ativan] [http://discussions.csbsju.edu/general/messages/25/gejobi-229.html phentermine online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/CoyarCharline/popydi.htm generic norco] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1142 free ericsson ringtones] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$92 cialis online] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=acdrago ultram online] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832229) free nokia ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=129 cheap levitra] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832237) real ringtones] [http://cacorol.blogdiario.com/ ericsson ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1104 cheap ortho] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832211) free free ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=353 samsung ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832206) order cyclobenzaprine] [http://relgetvar.jubiiblog.de/ wellbutrin online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=349 free punk ringtones] [http://pasorbas.jubiiblog.de/ free cool ringtones] [http://vigetc.jubiiblog.de/ clomid online] [http://livior.blogdiario.com/ alltel ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1106 lortab online] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832207) diazepam] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1130 sagem ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=sajohnst cheap ativan] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1123 free motorola ringtones] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$105 nextel ringtones] [http://racalmon.jubiiblog.de/ buy meridia] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1115 nokia ringtones] [http://algetca.jubiiblog.de/ paxil online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1132 free sony ericsson ringtones] [http://silly-n.blogspot.com best bonus casino online] [http://delelro.jubiiblog.de/ free sprint ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=vipasac free alltel ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=lirolsit buy xenical] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$130 tramadol online] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=coeignus fioricet online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=347 polyphonic ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=rebangas buy carisoprodol] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$90 buy ativan] [http://getnoel.blogdiario.com/ cheap ambien] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832196) free alltel ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1097 clomid online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/CoyarCharline/pecybu.htm cheap alprazolam] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=notrocvi free samsung ringtones] [http://boeldron.jubiiblog.de/ free nokia ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1078 cheap adipex] [http://basor5or5.blogdiario.com/ verizon ringtones] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=acrolbas kyocera ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832246) tracfone ringtones] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/AngelKristofer/votebu.htm free qwest ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031ad.htm cheap xanax] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/CoyarCharline/pyhux.htm generic clonazepam] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=133 buy xenical] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=319 free cingular ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=119 cheap cialis] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031c1.htm alprazolam online] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832227) nexium online] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=116 fioricet online] [http://sitracget.blogdiario.com/ free funny ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=144 mp3 ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=362 cheap ultracet] [http://trocgetou.jubiiblog.de/ cheap ativan] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=152 free verizon ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031b0.htm cheap diazepam] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=325 free ericsson ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1110 rivotril online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/AngelKristofer/nini.htm free ringtones] [http://forum.kharkiv.edu/SForums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=309&amp;FORUM_ID=3&amp;CAT_ID=3 cheap carisoprodol] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832255) xanax online] [http://cochibas.blogdiario.com/ free ringtones] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$125 free tracfone ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=125 buy vicodin] [http://pasricac.blogdiario.com/ free wwe ringtones] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=113 phentermine online] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=135 order cyclobenzaprine] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832250) verizon ringtones] [http://bascnadar.blogdiario.com/ hydrocodone online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=371 buy xenical] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832218) cheap levitra] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=329 hydrocodone online] [http://forum.kharkiv.edu/SForums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=316&amp;FORUM_ID=3&amp;CAT_ID=3 meridia online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=343 free nokia ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031af.htm cheap ultram] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=111 cheap soma] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=138 cheap propecia] [http://eleltrac.blogdiario.com/ buy ativan] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=lebowles cheap adipex] [http://getsitolo.jubiiblog.de/ lorazepam online] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$114 samsung ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1133 free mono ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1125 free sprint ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=355 cheap soma] [http://cagetca.jubiiblog.de/ celexa online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1029?id=atch1080 vicodin online] [http://discussions.csbsju.edu/general/messages/25/gyxex-235.html cialis online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=358 free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://ryu-jounetsu.blogspot.com canadian casino online] [http://rochili.jubiiblog.de/ cyclobenzaprine online] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=laoubo qwest ringtones] [http://ricvicna.blogdiario.com/ polyphonic ringtones] [http://pasbasor.blogdiario.com/ ultram online] [http://eltc4tric.jubiiblog.de/ xanax online] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=142 free tracfone ringtones] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1121 qwest ringtones] [http://ellapas.jubiiblog.de/ lipitor online] [http://forum.kharkiv.edu/SForums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=312&amp;FORUM_ID=3&amp;CAT_ID=3 ultram online] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=136 buy nexium] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$118 sony ericsson ringtones] [http://discussions.csbsju.edu/general/messages/25/xyli-236.html cheap ativan] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832257) order xenical] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031b1.htm cheap cialis] [http://www8.vjc.edu/EnvironmentalClub/discuss/msgReader$91 cheap carisoprodol] [http://www.forumhosting.org/forum.php?mforum=laerzel free sagem ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031b4.htm cheap meridia] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1120 nextel ringtones] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832194) but tramadol] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=317 carisoprodol online] [http://bondich.blogspot.com mixing valium and xanax] [http://eltaric.blogdiario.com/ cheap norco] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/CoyarCharline/xikuzo.htm valium online] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=322 cyclobenzaprine online] [http://pasbasbas.jubiiblog.de/ cheap clonazepam] [http://pathology.jhu.edu/N/n.web?EP=N&amp;URL=/MCGI/SEND1^WEBUTLTY(200,832216) free kyocera ringtones] [http://forum.kharkiv.edu/SForums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=317&amp;FORUM_ID=3&amp;CAT_ID=3 adipex online] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1031?id=atch1131 sonyericsson ringtones] [http://www.rso.cmich.edu/prevet/messageboard/000031ac.htm cheap carisoprodol] [http://www.csun.edu/learningnet/discussion/file.php?0,file=130 hydrocodone online] [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~twiki/pub/Main/AngelKristofer/ronut.htm sony ericsson ringtones] [https://www-internal.slac.stanford.edu/glast/integrationtest/online/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=334 cheap meridia] [http://src.moffitt.usf.edu/sf/sfmain/do/downloadAttachment/projects.jaffy/tracker.bug_tracker/artf1030?id=atch1108 cheap zanaflex] &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9c5c4c764549a4b37af2eec7bd98320be2d52022</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1326</id>
    <parentid>1325</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-28T00:15:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/216.129.98.144|216.129.98.144]] ([[User_talk:216.129.98.144|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Mdelaney|Mdelaney]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77ec96cb5aa9fdf43c44419bf290544e51ad108c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1327</id>
    <parentid>1326</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-29T22:21:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>202.173.112.10</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="15622" xml:space="preserve">[http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/zykygic.htm pharmacy online online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49073 cingular ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/NoriJohn/vyfuso.htm free free ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/peko.html free tracfone ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/dixopu.htm wwe ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/fivede.htm cheap lisinopril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/hyguf.htm free nextel ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49 nokia ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/MartinGeword valium online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49064 real ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/nesoz.html cheap adipex] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000284.html cheap phentermine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000377.html free sony ericsson ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/wujygyp.htm but norco] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/welop.htm vigrx online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49023 cheap meridia] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000350.html diethylpropion online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/RaimusNuhem nokia ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/luku.htm xenical online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/huki.html qwest ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49078 mono ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000298.html clonazepam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000282.html order soma] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/pyfi.htm sony ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/woryh.html free motorola ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/fuzuhe.htm order cialis] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=749 free sony ericsson ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/noliwu.htm midi ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37 paxil online] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=261 free tracfone ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=254 xanax online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=723 free alltel ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/tofi.htm cheap xanax] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000344.html pharmacy online online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/jicir.htm cheap viagra] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/vojenyx.htm alprazolam online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/sotuky.html soma online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/wudytel.htm free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/RobertDelise ultram online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=724 cheap alprazolam] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/webid.htm cheap hoodia] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49017 cheap diazepam] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rifykup.htm albuterol online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14 soma] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/hebur.htm free qwest ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=756 free verizon ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=729 clonazepam online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/kygo.htm kyocera ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BilyKroft/suvycez.htm soma online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/jucidul.htm cheap hgh] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/pyro.htm ambien online] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/NoriJohn/bepi.htm nextel ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000315.html cheap xenical] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kyvydin.htm order norco] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48834 cheap tramadol] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49026 cheap vicodin] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/tidu.htm verizon ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/jivugyv.htm alltel ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000371.html free music ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=748 soma online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=52 free funny ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=731 free funny ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/cogope.htm cialis online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49058 tracfone ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/solizup.htm tramadol online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/ArturJonson order xanax] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/duxeru.htm but vigrx] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49066 samsung ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/wytyvib.htm fioricet online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=741 paxil online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40 ambien online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/tijohyw.htm sprint ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/jetok.htm mp3 ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20 cheap fioricet] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/pefuwe.htm order lipitor] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wohux.html cheap ultracet] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/ligi.htm tenuate online] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/cucof.htm soma online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/LukeLookin cheap phentermine] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/pinucep.htm vicodin online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/hujox.htm cheap ortho] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wusywyx.html cheap vicodin] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/lunic.html levitra online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49024 adipex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/vuxinuz.htm motorola ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=722 adipex online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000365.html free nextel ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21 order ultram] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/jusify.htm free nokia ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=262 free funny ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48922 carisoprodol online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=742 buy phentermine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000283.html order valium] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/jowili.htm free qwest ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000342.html tenuate online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=750 free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/licox.htm motorola ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000319.html cheap cyclobenzaprine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000295.html norco online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/tokuny.htm lortab online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000354.html flexeril online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=752 tracfone ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000285.html carisoprodol online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000299.html paxil] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49063 free qwest ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=249 tramadol online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/sywexyc.htm levitra online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/zexuc.htm cheap didrex] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000380.html free punk ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kite.htm online ultracet] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000311.html buy hydrocodone] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42 xenical online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/luho.html nokia ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/rufog.htm free sprint ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/jujope.htm buy diethylpropion] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000294.html adipex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/roteryh.htm free polyphonic ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/AndreaHolivel cialis online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49016 order ultram] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000336.html clomid online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/hijosij.htm sagem ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/bigibe.html free nextel ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49027 alprazolam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000288.html cheap ultram] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/hicif.htm alprazolam online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/sujy.htm free samsung ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25 cheap viagra] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=735 motorola ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/jybuhi.htm cheap viagra] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48916 order phentermine] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=256 cheap ultram] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=760 cheap diazepam] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/xyhyj.htm cheap rivotril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/vuru.htm ativan online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/hykidi.htm order clonazepam] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000281.html tramadol online] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=253 buy carisoprodol] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26 cheap meridia] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/dydyse.html valium online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rukexo.htm zoloft online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/kuxer.html cyclobenzaprine online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/cybo.htm free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/nezyz.htm cheap flexeril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/lyfogo.htm xanax] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/wofo.htm nokia ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/sonuhop.htm valium online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/pevesuz.htm cheap wellbutrin] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rypel.htm online sildenafil] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000339.html cheap zoloft] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=251 cheap valium] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000384.html midi ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000290.html cialis online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=744 free qwest ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=266 real ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/kino.htm real ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/belizyl.htm polyphonic ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/dijuxoj.htm tracfone ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000322.html cheap ultracet] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28 norco online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49072 free polyphonic ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=732 buy levitra] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/woguked.htm ambien online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000334.html sildenafil online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000333.html prozac online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/rucod.html online xanax] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000343.html cheap ortho] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wypy.html funny ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000296.html cheap vicodin] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BilyKroft/koky.htm phentermine online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=740 cheap norco] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/figog.htm buy lortab] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kozu.htm cheap hydrocodone] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24 ativan online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/godufit.htm paxil online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/sevuv.htm free mono ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=755 online valium] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/sicofyr.htm tramadol online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/kuvodoj.htm zoloft online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49034 online hydrocodone] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49022 viagra online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/niwupu.htm but albuterol] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/gedenu.htm cheap rivotril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/dyzoko.htm verizon ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000314.html lorazepam] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/rejyvob.htm viagra online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000325.html order didrex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/kuzypuh.htm order phentermine] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/nofelyr.htm free cingular ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000389.html ericsson ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49077 sony ericsson ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=267 motorola ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/kuluc.htm zanaflex online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/gekiw.htm flexeril online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000369.html samsung ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=259 nokia ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22 diazepam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000376.html free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/devowy.html lorazepam online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/role.html free real ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000351.html but rivotril] &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3248b76a0ca329990bc7fb07866a5c9c5de5e263</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1328</id>
    <parentid>1327</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T00:05:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/202.173.112.10|202.173.112.10]] ([[User_talk:202.173.112.10|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77ec96cb5aa9fdf43c44419bf290544e51ad108c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1329</id>
    <parentid>1328</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T20:25:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;MikeD</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="15622" xml:space="preserve">[http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/zykygic.htm pharmacy online online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49073 cingular ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/NoriJohn/vyfuso.htm free free ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/peko.html free tracfone ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/dixopu.htm wwe ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/fivede.htm cheap lisinopril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/hyguf.htm free nextel ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49 nokia ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/MartinGeword valium online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49064 real ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/nesoz.html cheap adipex] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000284.html cheap phentermine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000377.html free sony ericsson ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/wujygyp.htm but norco] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/welop.htm vigrx online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49023 cheap meridia] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000350.html diethylpropion online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/RaimusNuhem nokia ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/luku.htm xenical online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/huki.html qwest ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49078 mono ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000298.html clonazepam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000282.html order soma] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/pyfi.htm sony ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/woryh.html free motorola ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/fuzuhe.htm order cialis] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=749 free sony ericsson ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/noliwu.htm midi ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37 paxil online] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=261 free tracfone ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=254 xanax online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=723 free alltel ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/tofi.htm cheap xanax] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000344.html pharmacy online online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/jicir.htm cheap viagra] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/vojenyx.htm alprazolam online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/sotuky.html soma online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/wudytel.htm free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/RobertDelise ultram online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=724 cheap alprazolam] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/webid.htm cheap hoodia] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49017 cheap diazepam] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rifykup.htm albuterol online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14 soma] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/hebur.htm free qwest ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=756 free verizon ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=729 clonazepam online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SherylDiu/kygo.htm kyocera ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BilyKroft/suvycez.htm soma online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/jucidul.htm cheap hgh] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/pyro.htm ambien online] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/NoriJohn/bepi.htm nextel ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000315.html cheap xenical] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kyvydin.htm order norco] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48834 cheap tramadol] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49026 cheap vicodin] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/tidu.htm verizon ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/jivugyv.htm alltel ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000371.html free music ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=748 soma online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=52 free funny ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=731 free funny ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/cogope.htm cialis online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49058 tracfone ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/solizup.htm tramadol online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/ArturJonson order xanax] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/duxeru.htm but vigrx] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49066 samsung ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/wytyvib.htm fioricet online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=741 paxil online] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40 ambien online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/tijohyw.htm sprint ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/jetok.htm mp3 ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20 cheap fioricet] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/pefuwe.htm order lipitor] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wohux.html cheap ultracet] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/ligi.htm tenuate online] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/cucof.htm soma online] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/LukeLookin cheap phentermine] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/pinucep.htm vicodin online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/hujox.htm cheap ortho] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wusywyx.html cheap vicodin] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/lunic.html levitra online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49024 adipex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/vuxinuz.htm motorola ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=722 adipex online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000365.html free nextel ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21 order ultram] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/jusify.htm free nokia ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=262 free funny ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48922 carisoprodol online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=742 buy phentermine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000283.html order valium] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/jowili.htm free qwest ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000342.html tenuate online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=750 free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/licox.htm motorola ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000319.html cheap cyclobenzaprine] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000295.html norco online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/tokuny.htm lortab online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000354.html flexeril online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=752 tracfone ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000285.html carisoprodol online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000299.html paxil] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49063 free qwest ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=249 tramadol online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/sywexyc.htm levitra online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/zexuc.htm cheap didrex] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000380.html free punk ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kite.htm online ultracet] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000311.html buy hydrocodone] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42 xenical online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/luho.html nokia ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/rufog.htm free sprint ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/jujope.htm buy diethylpropion] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000294.html adipex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/roteryh.htm free polyphonic ringtones] [http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/AndreaHolivel cialis online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49016 order ultram] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000336.html clomid online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/hijosij.htm sagem ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/bigibe.html free nextel ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49027 alprazolam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000288.html cheap ultram] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/hicif.htm alprazolam online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/sujy.htm free samsung ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25 cheap viagra] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=735 motorola ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/jybuhi.htm cheap viagra] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=48916 order phentermine] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=256 cheap ultram] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=760 cheap diazepam] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/xyhyj.htm cheap rivotril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/vuru.htm ativan online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/hykidi.htm order clonazepam] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000281.html tramadol online] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=253 buy carisoprodol] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26 cheap meridia] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/dydyse.html valium online] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rukexo.htm zoloft online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/kuxer.html cyclobenzaprine online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/cybo.htm free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/nezyz.htm cheap flexeril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/lyfogo.htm xanax] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/wofo.htm nokia ringtones] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/sonuhop.htm valium online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/RobertSmith/pevesuz.htm cheap wellbutrin] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/rypel.htm online sildenafil] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000339.html cheap zoloft] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=251 cheap valium] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000384.html midi ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000290.html cialis online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=744 free qwest ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=266 real ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/kino.htm real ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/belizyl.htm polyphonic ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/PhillipRewers/dijuxoj.htm tracfone ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000322.html cheap ultracet] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28 norco online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49072 free polyphonic ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=732 buy levitra] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/woguked.htm ambien online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000334.html sildenafil online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000333.html prozac online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/rucod.html online xanax] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000343.html cheap ortho] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/wypy.html funny ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000296.html cheap vicodin] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BilyKroft/koky.htm phentermine online] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=740 cheap norco] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/HermanHogg/figog.htm buy lortab] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/AlexCarneyham/kozu.htm cheap hydrocodone] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24 ativan online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/AshleighRodriquez/godufit.htm paxil online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/sevuv.htm free mono ringtones] [http://bugzilla.internet2.edu/attachment.cgi?id=755 online valium] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JamesMiller/sicofyr.htm tramadol online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/kuvodoj.htm zoloft online] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49034 online hydrocodone] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49022 viagra online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/BettySmith/niwupu.htm but albuterol] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/MarthaBell/gedenu.htm cheap rivotril] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/PaulinePauline/dyzoko.htm verizon ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000314.html lorazepam] [http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/rejyvob.htm viagra online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000325.html order didrex] [http://ccfl.unl.edu/twiki/pub/Main/SummersFrank/kuzypuh.htm order phentermine] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/SelmaJeremy/nofelyr.htm free cingular ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000389.html ericsson ringtones] [http://dcc.syr.edu/dforum/message.asp?MessageID=49077 sony ericsson ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=267 motorola ringtones] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/kuluc.htm zanaflex online] [http://wwwx.cs.unc.edu/~kmp/twiki40/pub/Main/JustinJonson/gekiw.htm flexeril online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000369.html samsung ringtones] [http://devel.linux.duke.edu/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=259 nokia ringtones] [http://www.coe.unt.edu/chec/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22 diazepam online] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000376.html free sonyericsson ringtones] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/devowy.html lorazepam online] [http://ist.greenville.edu/drupal/files/role.html free real ringtones] [http://www.hollins.edu/ubb/Forum32/HTML/000351.html but rivotril] &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3248b76a0ca329990bc7fb07866a5c9c5de5e263</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1330</id>
    <parentid>1329</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T20:27:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/MikeD|MikeD]] ([[User_talk:MikeD|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77ec96cb5aa9fdf43c44419bf290544e51ad108c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Undescribed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>165</id>
  <revision>
    <id>583</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T03:46:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for undescribed categories that aren't called missing by MediaWiki</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="462" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This category lacks a description.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} providing]&lt;/span&gt; one.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Undescribed Categories]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;!-- [[Category:Stub Templates]] --&gt;
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1df2af667053e7347095e30b96b1a66ab7a58cd6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Offtopic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>137</id>
  <revision>
    <id>451</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T21:56:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>a tag for articles that may be offtopic</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="368" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this article is not on topic for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>edeb2f2c98520bb70503feec438fa45c2f723f39</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Inappropriate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>111</id>
  <revision>
    <id>328</id>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T21:58:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>A tag for articles that may not be appropriate</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="371" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this article is not appropriate for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>44247993f72d057d3de5f441c704d267ebe55de0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>329</id>
    <parentid>328</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-04-30T22:06:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>fixing categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="375" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this article is not appropriate for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Inappropriate]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3c5a957eee3fd4e3f3ef36d2d4789485aecdc964</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Resource Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>151</id>
  <revision>
    <id>512</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-03T22:20:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for resource stubs</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a resource stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Resource Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32295e4c2d217c572e03a055143823f4da166893</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Mission Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>130</id>
  <revision>
    <id>417</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-03T22:33:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>mission or probe stubs' tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a mission or probe stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Mission and Probe Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7fe8c3d26b51e4c919ec67c3a9946e9a0f278675</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:Event Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>86</id>
  <revision>
    <id>223</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-07T06:00:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for new stub category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="437" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an event stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Event Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ed1fe13e31a54d305a1576ad4ca3a48a523b903e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>745</id>
    <parentid>744</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-07T06:15:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Dcarson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="882" xml:space="preserve">The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] is being held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme is 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Pending}}
{{Event Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect.


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>9643189a1bde00e95f88d126a840e967a7582605</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:One Sided Article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>205</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1169</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:08:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;" |- | [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]] |&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-side...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="344" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.'''&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by restructuring or rephrasing it.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}</text>
    <sha1>0be3c8eadb5cf28eb421d66389ed83af90f0eed4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1170</id>
    <parentid>1169</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:09:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>[[Template:One Sided]] moved to [[Template:One Sided Article]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="344" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.'''&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by restructuring or rephrasing it.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}</text>
    <sha1>0be3c8eadb5cf28eb421d66389ed83af90f0eed4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1171</id>
    <parentid>1170</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:27:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biased Articles]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e60c90d20becf4e90a208a3f454a3b462617fbb3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070408213935|1394">
  <title>Template:One Sided Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>206</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1174</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:11:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;" |- | [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]] |&lt;center&gt;'''This section may be presenting a one-side...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="344" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This section may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.'''&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by restructuring or rephrasing it.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}</text>
    <sha1>bb2e94cb6509879dccf3486a760f982e4f1ddbca</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:One Sided Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>206</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1175</id>
    <parentid>1174</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:33:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This section may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biased Sections]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9194fc8f88d10a51fa8d69d7d3904f152415cdac</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1176</id>
    <parentid>1175</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:46:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="465" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This section may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:POV]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>65ab0207973311cecea6c4c767730a578eb35d07</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:One Sided Article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>205</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1172</id>
    <parentid>1171</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T01:46:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="465" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:POV]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0f13c5c804c3256b39c34431ec60e761bff370bc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Controversial Question Series</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>81</id>
  <revision>
    <id>198</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T15:05:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>stab at template for the controversial question series</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="720" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Controversial Question 1.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is part of the '''Controversial Question Series'''.  Its purpose is not to come to final answers or even to reach a consensus. It is simply to explore the breadth of opinion in the Lunar development community.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} participating]&lt;/span&gt; in the exploration (or roasting) of this question or proposal.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversial Questions]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cba4785ef457441f1c9965b2b6bfcdc3dedac6c1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:PersPosArticle</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>207</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1178</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T17:28:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: This article reflects the personal position of</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">This article reflects the personal position of</text>
    <sha1>27935b41c448dcba87e7ec2eff5d9d454ee8bb11</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:PersPosSection</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>208</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1180</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-08T17:32:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: This section reflects the personal position of</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">This section reflects the personal position of</text>
    <sha1>439a612c6ff4c08797486016853eb6577c09735e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>653</id>
    <parentid>652</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:47:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1468" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
{{Physics Stub}}

An '''Ablating Material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

It should be noted that use of ablating material for heat shields has two significant drawbacks:  first, the mass of the material must either be carried throughout the mission (at an attendant penalty to payload capacity) or must be installed immediately before reentry (adding greatly to complexity and raising safety concerns if, for whatever reason, the installation fails) and, second, the coating is a single-use component, making it unattractive as an option on reusable vehicles.

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>80fa4745160ca6612f3886efc06baa4a5ca46cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>703</id>
    <parentid>702</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:49:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="557" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Inst Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>9cb4ebbadd93a7b3069779038fd73bed2693cf03</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>704</id>
    <parentid>703</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:32:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>784</id>
    <parentid>783</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:49:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1254" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{Inst Stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>7e361f43c2f89aef44f590332e8c03469a998d92</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>938</id>
    <parentid>937</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:54:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1341" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
== NASA-003, NASA-008 ==

Two specially-modified Boeing B-52 heavy bombers, with eight jet engines in 4 clusters of two, two of these clusters slung beneath each wing. A special hanging "cradle" was added beneath the starboard wing, between the inboard engine cluster and the fuselage. Used to launch X-15 rocketplanes (some of whose pilots flew high enough to earn their astronaut wings), to launch lifting bodies, and to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  One of these aircraft, tail number NASA-003 (retired 1969), is on public display at the Pima Air &amp; Space Museum near Tucson, AZ. See: http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm [http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm Boeing NB-52A 'Stratofortress' SN: 52-0003].

NASA-008 first flew in 1955 June 11 and was retired on 2004 December 17. See:  http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html B-52B "Mothership" Launch Aircraft]

The "mothership" idea continues to be used, most recently by the winner of the X-Prize, SpaceShip One, and followup craft. There is also a rumored secret Air Force space plane project, commonly referred to as "Aurora", which may also use a "mothership" configuration (if it exists).

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Boosters]]</text>
    <sha1>0f41865740317b929344584bc17867f220cb401d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>939</id>
    <parentid>938</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:23:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>714</id>
    <parentid>713</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:54:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="164" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>51dfa0c88dd22e9a60cebd437a88b5ea955d9a7b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>715</id>
    <parentid>714</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:32:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>818</id>
    <parentid>817</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:54:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1711" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*[[Energia]]/[[Buran]] - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999
*[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961
*[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975
*[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973 (see [[Apollo]])
*[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994
*[[Titan-IV]] -  October 19, 2005
*[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*[[Conestoga]]

===Europe/ELDO===
*[[Europa-II]]

===Russia/USSR ===
*[[N-1]]

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*[[Otrag]] 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*[[Dolphin]]
*[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[American Rocket Company]] ) 
*[[Percheron]] 
*[[X-33]] 

==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
*[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>72f12202554797ddc55b596cff0d00f48bef7b93</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>819</id>
    <parentid>818</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:29:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>676</id>
    <parentid>675</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:56:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="679" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Business Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>e1857240ba9a093fceb48aa4f693102ec2df7771</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>677</id>
    <parentid>676</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:33:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1080</id>
    <parentid>1079</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:56:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="443" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop 
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 

Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007 

Cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

Sponsor: [[Space Engineering and Science Institute]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>e231581ffb38575d495b55e54e290c4ca6200367</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1081</id>
    <parentid>1080</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:22:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>642</id>
    <parentid>641</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:57:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="218" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>1957bfd5b1164b851a6f74ba83edcc1b318b73de</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>726</id>
    <parentid>725</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:57:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="147" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

Cosponsored by [[IEEE]] and [[AIAA]]

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>f3a0ab4d31e64c832029d3e3c6e6e1fed9fada6e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>727</id>
    <parentid>726</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:31:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>746</id>
    <parentid>745</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:59:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="897" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] is being held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme is 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Pending}}
{{Event Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect.


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>7e4663ffacf020687c72f1b5fc7c7d10ad1b5d76</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>747</id>
    <parentid>746</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:30:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>734</id>
    <parentid>733</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-12T16:59:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>added move2space tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="315" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The Annual gathering of the National Space Society, usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend.  Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have been in Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia.

[[International Space Development Conference 2007]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>9a0ab55af4d342127f47647118118030ad077155</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>735</id>
    <parentid>734</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:31:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Still Coming Together</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>160</id>
  <revision>
    <id>557</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-13T18:05:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>This Lunarpedia Feature is still coming together</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="299" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 2px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Still Coming Together.png|96px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFFFFF;font-size:16pt;"&gt; This Lunarpedia Feature is still coming together.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>71ccaf40524545a62db4e54e89968813dd99fe6d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:ConceptScenario</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>201</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1134</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-14T08:00:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| width=85% align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"  |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; ...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="661" xml:space="preserve">{| width=85% align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
 |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
   {| width=100% cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
    | style="width: 32px; height: 32px; background: #f6f6f6; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Bulb.png|32px]]
    | style="text-align: center;" |'''This article is a presentation of a concept scenario.'''&lt;br /&gt;&lt;small&gt;Please see the relevant discussion on the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#{{{1|}}}|talk page]]&lt;/small&gt;
    |}
  &lt;/div&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Concept Scenarios]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d65edc8678be407438ebc28c73d388f3ef84c452</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>96</id>
  <revision>
    <id>268</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-19T23:43:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="695" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2b8bf76ba038efc2c2e86ae6eecad5f8a6030453</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>269</id>
    <parentid>268</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-19T23:54:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="701" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d011ccaeac24c0c7db4e59bcd53e58d7015924c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>97</id>
  <revision>
    <id>272</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-19T23:51:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="711" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>368ecbb1565b56d1c671f17f19bdf6354bbd980c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>273</id>
    <parentid>272</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-19T23:53:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="717" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6101e07ffe24823ffb1cbc49868cb13b1a9e2945</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1400</id>
    <parentid>1399</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-20T00:35:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt; */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5314" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;


'''Importing of initial content from a public domain source is &lt;STRIKE&gt;in progress&lt;/STRIKE&gt; completed.'''


{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Letter
|A
|B
|C
|D
|E
|F
|G
|H
|I
|J
|K
|L
|M
|N
|O
|P
|Q
|R
|S
|T
|U
|V
|W
|X
|Y
|Z
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Collected
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|-  style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Corrections
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Processed
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FF3F00;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#000000;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" | Uploaded
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|X
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>8737a8bf6bd2e8b7fad22aa3d7cff0ac5fd10484</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Goto marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>105</id>
  <revision>
    <id>302</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-29T22:30:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>template for relocated pages</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="746" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ed4bb9db5e2b51f73f5c438c900dfcc9b6699c46</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>303</id>
    <parentid>302</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:15:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="731" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ad36cda33f1a3455054d5e049653fe367cfa67cd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Goto sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>106</id>
  <revision>
    <id>307</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-29T22:38:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>template for scientifiction interwiki redirect pages</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="752" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Scientifiction.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[sf:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>845df2c3c16c1cdb69eb5a7eb8b24744ac2084b3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>308</id>
    <parentid>307</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T02:43:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="738" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Scientifiction.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[sf:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.


[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d1005472edb3027bc4caecf4fbcce0504906f6c5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Template:Goto space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>107</id>
  <revision>
    <id>311</id>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T02:35:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for moved to Exoplatz</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="744" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2e6eccb1adca555f6b2f6e59f595356ac7d75980</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>312</id>
    <parentid>311</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T02:39:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="729" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>240a4a962fef197847f0c597121a8b3391ce1921</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>313</id>
    <parentid>312</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T02:42:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>doh</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="729" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>de99849cc4a6f040d00835eaed1345582b3ca545</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1106</id>
    <parentid>1105</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:22:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>950</id>
    <parentid>949</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:23:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>928</id>
    <parentid>927</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:24:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>907</id>
    <parentid>906</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:26:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>847</id>
    <parentid>846</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:28:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>771</id>
    <parentid>770</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:29:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>760</id>
    <parentid>759</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:30:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>688</id>
    <parentid>687</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:33:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070508013326|1175">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>664</id>
    <parentid>663</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:33:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>654</id>
    <parentid>653</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:33:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>643</id>
    <parentid>642</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-05-30T03:34:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{Goto space}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Move2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>135</id>
  <revision>
    <id>444</id>
    <parentid>443</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-04T12:03:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>gave name for general space wiki</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to the Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to General Space]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ba9c521979e95a9005ca22032fe3e84e4eef1645</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Fork2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>92</id>
  <revision>
    <id>255</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-04T12:35:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new tag -- fork request</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="334" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f76363264f4ea12034093c8aa01445c7b48eaa1a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Fork2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>91</id>
  <revision>
    <id>252</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-04T12:44:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag requesting fork of article on scientifiction.org</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="342" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>709ea17830819087686e5d8078022613a6f7dda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>228</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1264</id>
    <parentid>1263</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:26:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0963ad5ddac6c5d4569fa14e6eee7778c6909f6e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Past Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>236</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1319</id>
    <parentid>1318</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:28:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>21a8fbf17a59582a5e76a323afb12f3484bf76d4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>235</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1315</id>
    <parentid>1314</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:29:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>62036638eec69581636ffd0fd52aea02f3dcfb3c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Past Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>238</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1331</id>
    <parentid>1330</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:29:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c98eb40755a1e02eed0f0da6e3a9d63fb6988600</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User NSS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>232</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1302</id>
    <parentid>1301</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:29:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="482" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0d09398f9604f8369640152d0b57496e110ec189</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1303</id>
    <parentid>1302</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-10-10T03:04:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>122.252.226.40</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">eldardronze
&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95481399c043494d6ea497cbdcb2ac95b2c8840f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User NSS Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>233</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1308</id>
    <parentid>1307</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:29:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="484" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former officer of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d382d15ce1107352812f9e15c2b5b40eb9338703</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>231</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1279</id>
    <parentid>1278</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:30:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="485" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4f6ff3e93b52a53682f6fe1cac01038044689023</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User USMC</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>244</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1346</id>
    <parentid>1345</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:31:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''USMC'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a former Marine.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5b336576a4e3dfe507a3e02086543a08ba06ca9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Sf Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>241</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1339</id>
    <parentid>1338</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:32:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9899bca677fd5edae9f4b0a12ebfea7e2b7f1c16</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Sf Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>240</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1336</id>
    <parentid>1335</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:32:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="431" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>748f398d966085c19e875bd5306efc75dcaee9cb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>245</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1356</id>
    <parentid>1355</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T16:33:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px green solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #07BF07; text-align: center; color: black;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''V'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Vegetarian'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ad4a3ea4808444f51011ed5e4e22e2ad40eb3126</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User MarsS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>225</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1252</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T19:19:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="491" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marssociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[marsp:Mars Society|Mars Society&lt;sup&gt;marsp&lt;/sup&gt;]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9ed566715323497ec042590a73823485431c90f2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1253</id>
    <parentid>1252</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-08T19:21:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="495" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marssociety-weblogo_43x43.JPG‎ ]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[marsp:Mars Society|Mars Society&lt;sup&gt;marsp&lt;/sup&gt;]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a576bb850bc13ca3bf54e86082e96ca9402eb5d1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Eng Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>85</id>
  <revision>
    <id>219</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-10T17:35:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="446" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an engineering stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Engineering Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dee2b5ef5e2ea20bd5be19b0a8da8d99f7102f57</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Online Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>139</id>
  <revision>
    <id>460</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-11T13:05:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an online resource or community stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Online Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a48e2f118adee59d29b420b8cbd9803a22a7c05b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Restricted Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>152</id>
  <revision>
    <id>516</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-13T21:07:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new image tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="307" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
|- style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" 
| {| 
| [[Image:Warning Sign.png|64px]]
| This image is available under restrictive terms.  Please ensure that they are adhered to.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:License tags]]</text>
    <sha1>ae073185b0cf771be142c8fc744606fe3debe5a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>87</id>
  <revision>
    <id>227</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T14:11:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Attempt at interwiki link template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="271" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;sup&gt;&lt;b&gt;exd&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0515d83bb45ee95e91c6f97544251e217b5e7dbc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>228</id>
    <parentid>227</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T14:41:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkering</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="323" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;exd&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c6829feec0c87fa64ec984896aa33fd410920508</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>229</id>
    <parentid>228</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:11:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>fix attempt</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="322" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;exd&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3260c3d503a05d31d62676e6faff260df2495f07</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>230</id>
    <parentid>229</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-08-05T21:18:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>trying for image icon for interwiki linking</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="281" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}[[Image:Exodictionary.png|14px]]]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5f9589d3463c19f8e0677954654e6b49b48a93d4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>231</id>
    <parentid>230</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-08-05T21:24:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkering</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="281" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}]][[Image:Exodictionary.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5b5c93774893bf93977475696d9febe0a72f90c1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>127</id>
  <revision>
    <id>402</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T14:45:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>marsp interwiki template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="351" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;marsp&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>966b47a53449a719414517936520a825ff527921</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>403</id>
    <parentid>402</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:13:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>applying fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;marsp&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e3e19f4f732ed132e9fe40a18fd1f36b37731f2c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>542</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T14:50:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>exoplatz interwiki template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="398" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;space&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>172fd493bc2234f2ab35582263849445a1902ede</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>543</id>
    <parentid>542</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:13:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>applying fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="397" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;space&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f6a805b1bda9517df77fe9f3e4dd3e85f0fecccb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>544</id>
    <parentid>543</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-08-07T17:36:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>trying to apply icon concept</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="365" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}]][[Image:Spaceicon H519 0958 link.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0db846b0ada1bdabf05525077bcf2604ee7238d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>537</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T14:56:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>scientifiction interwiki template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="330" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;sf&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4ae8209ff87090a7a36f038f1a362ed4e90b1bd1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>538</id>
    <parentid>537</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:14:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>applying fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="329" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;sf&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>15f24ef0dd50b7523c545625ebc65547785109b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>382</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:00:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Lunarpedia interwiki link template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="318" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;lunarp&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]
&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b50b6f217bd0ad7f33fc96014d94b0e37c140881</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>383</id>
    <parentid>382</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-14T15:15:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>applying fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;font-size:60%"&gt;&lt;SUP&gt;&lt;U&gt;lunarp&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/SUP&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bc34ea22a3bf219f85895375b16788ee65aab4a4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Pub Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>146</id>
  <revision>
    <id>491</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-16T12:50:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a book or publication stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Publication Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f868ee2478c49d586364f249992b83c13c557c4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Comm Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>79</id>
  <revision>
    <id>189</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-17T17:15:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new stub tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a communications stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Communications Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7dba4f949517458621b049101577ec7d9ab333dd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:MMM</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>124</id>
  <revision>
    <id>390</id>
    <timestamp>2007-06-27T04:40:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Moon Miners' Manifesto derived content tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="649" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>eb0d2f2e5fc0e87832e948047da5ded97400c78b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>391</id>
    <parentid>390</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-06-28T14:38:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>forgot the &lt;includeonly&gt;</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;includeonly&gt;[[Category:Moon Miners' Manifesto based articles]]&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2952cef88792eb54d67b8dde5c3b58c9c5039d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Cleanup Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>78</id>
  <revision>
    <id>186</id>
    <timestamp>2007-07-10T15:56:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>long overdue section cleanup tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this section has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>634c5fbab801a2660df65136d7ed3a61dcdb4ca4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Spec Melt</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>159</id>
  <revision>
    <id>554</id>
    <timestamp>2007-07-10T16:01:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag to note dissolidification of seemingly etched in granite specs</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="320" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This specification is being reevaluated or is in need of replacement'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e88d91770ea3fb8d1b1278629fd9d1d50c78e45c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1401</id>
    <parentid>1400</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-07-21T04:02:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Welcome to Exodictionary! */ replacing obsolete progress chart with index table</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7190" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.10 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>a078e5b7f7f177ac4b281fe240b848d88b963e40</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User 4 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>215</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1215</id>
    <timestamp>2007-08-14T01:24:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="476" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_3.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''FOUR DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9566b269ce4df55cee364a3fc130607f8f715609</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1216</id>
    <parentid>1215</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-08-14T01:29:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="476" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_4.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''FOUR DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dc2d086250ccedf1ce5fa35e4acc24d69dbd0497</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User 4 Eyes</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>216</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1218</id>
    <timestamp>2007-08-14T01:42:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="400" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:4_eyes.gif]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Really has 4 eyes.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fa6736bc1e87434273c7648e9da7720f330fa5fa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:User Sims2</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>242</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1341</id>
    <timestamp>2007-08-14T02:10:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="424" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Sims2.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Plays [http://www.thesims2.com The Sims 2].
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8e4cdf79854c2e221f0c890db373c7479147352e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>Template:Remove to list</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>150</id>
  <revision>
    <id>508</id>
    <timestamp>2007-09-17T18:55:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag for subminimals that should be on a bootstrap list until actual content is available</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="507" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this subminimal stub should be listed as an entry in a bootstrap list and temporarily removed.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;If any amount of useful content is added here, please remove this tag. 
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Remove to Bootstrap List]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4f905b67e29fedea9ea45bc319ce112f18863ef1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20070530033358|654">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>689</id>
    <parentid>688</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-09-27T09:21:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>195.55.130.44</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="27" xml:space="preserve">c4teltalracz
{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>79bfae6b61416490d6f62636728805c1f2eb60c7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>690</id>
    <parentid>689</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-09-28T07:41:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/195.55.130.44|195.55.130.44]] ([[User talk:195.55.130.44|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Category:Lunarpedia userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>44</id>
  <revision>
    <id>85</id>
    <parentid>84</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-10-16T04:35:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>122.214.180.254</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="51" xml:space="preserve">livinochis
&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>db408ccf724f6123a0dd2f69a3a554ea2be07b74</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>691</id>
    <parentid>690</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-10-25T02:28:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>82.111.20.202</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="24" xml:space="preserve">liricdron
{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>6b5d8e6ef028438716ea3881bac56d13715c6028</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>692</id>
    <parentid>691</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-10-28T13:18:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/82.111.20.202|82.111.20.202]] ([[User talk:82.111.20.202|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>693</id>
    <parentid>692</parentid>
    <timestamp>2007-10-28T13:19:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Protected "[[British Interplanetary Society]]": article moved to exoplatz [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>694</id>
    <parentid>693</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-07T18:14:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1402</id>
    <parentid>1401</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-02-27T05:54:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Software Capabilities */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7196" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>db24aa188c2a6b0d7935935b88ce5cab5e869091</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1403</id>
    <parentid>1402</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-07-01T00:25:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Philljf12345900</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>buy cheap wow gold,powerleveling,items,accounts,quests and wow lvl.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="280" xml:space="preserve">wow-lvl.com is a wholesale store for buying cheap wow gold,wow money,[http://www.wow-lvl.com wow items],[http://www.wow-lvl.com wow accounts],[http://www.wow-lvl.com wow power leveling],wow quests with instant delivery and world class service for each loyal and reliable customer.</text>
    <sha1>12be19b4256a06e3842ed4f227e2cab2bac2cf29</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1404</id>
    <parentid>1403</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-07-02T16:32:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/Philljf12345900|Philljf12345900]] ([[User talk:Philljf12345900|Talk]]); changed back to last version by [[User:Mdelaney|Mdelaney]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7196" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>db24aa188c2a6b0d7935935b88ce5cab5e869091</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1405</id>
    <parentid>1404</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-07-02T16:37:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Changed protection level for "[[Main Page]]": response to junk account attack on main pages [edit=sysop:move=sysop]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7196" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
&lt;!--
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  Construction is underway and you can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>db24aa188c2a6b0d7935935b88ce5cab5e869091</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1107</id>
    <parentid>1106</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-05-04T01:31:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1060" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

==Tethers versus Mass Drivers==
There is an incorrect statement on exoplatz at http://www.exoplatz.org/index.php?title=Tether.  It is written: "It (a tether) has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on the Moon as well as depart from the Moon."  When one considers that a mass driver can be built in orbit around Luna, it is not hard to see how a mass driver can be used to soft land cargo on Luna.  A mass driver can orbit as close to a Lunar mountain peak as a tether can.  If it accelerates cargo to the rear at orbital velocity relative to itself as it goes past a mountain peak, that cargo is brought to a stop relative to Luna.  Further, there is no physical law that would be broken to develop (at some future time) the ability for cargo in orbit to rendezvous with a carrier on Luna travling on a magnetically levitating track at orbital velocity and then slowing the cargo to a stop by regenerative braking (hopefully before reaching the end of the track).  --[[User:Farred|Farred]] 01:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)</text>
    <sha1>95e2289d4ca3b65004e133579d738143277355ec</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1108</id>
    <parentid>1107</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-05-04T14:16:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Cfrjlr</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 11939 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|Talk]]) -&gt; Moving to DISCUSSION tab</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1109</id>
    <parentid>1108</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-11T18:27:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Article moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>23f653e7b23c5c7878f63b2c3c49d798dff6f5c2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Rough</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>153</id>
  <revision>
    <id>519</id>
    <timestamp>2008-05-09T12:33:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Rough page tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:7pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This page is full of rough and unformatted information or ideas.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} working it into an article]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c333fe6678bd86eff933cb4bff2d1ee05dc803d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Featured article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>203</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1140</id>
    <timestamp>2008-05-14T11:29:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Using KREEP as a proof of concept feature article as it has a nice photo in it...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="920" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[KREEP]]===
[[Image:A12 Kreep12013.gif|160px|left]] KREEP is an acronym used in geochemistry to represent a mixture of K-[[potassium]], REE-[[rare earth elements]], and P-[[phosphorus]].  It is not only the main source of these elements on the moon, but also many other trace elements such as [[uranium]], [[thorium]], [[fluorine]], [[chlorine]], and [[zirconium]].  

...

''So to get alloy ingredients for workable metals, nutrients for agriculture, industrial reagents and much more, special concentrations such as [[ilmenite]] and KREEP will play a vital role." - [[Peter Kokh]]''
'''([[KREEP|read more]])'''
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt; --&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7cf3febce228e91bf15871a26f17dd142f77154b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1141</id>
    <parentid>1140</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-29T08:15:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>changing Featured Article</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="946" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]]===
[[Image:MLS1_Brick.GIF|160px|left]] Sintered [[regolith]] falls into the category of ceramic materials as sintering is the process most common to ceramics.  When bricks are made from clay on Earth, first the bricks are heated long enough and hot enough to drive out the water.  Then the heating is increased to cause partial melting or vitrification which results in the edges of adjacent grains being bonded together once they have cooled.  The unmelted particles provide a stable shape and size during the process which involves some shrinkage and a decrease in porosity...'''([[Sintered regolith|read more]])'''
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt; --&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>63f0e905933e633bceff7fb8e0e541aaa6ffcacd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1142</id>
    <parentid>1141</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-29T08:19:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>modifying featured article</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1087" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]]===
[[Image:MLS1_Brick.GIF|160px|left]] Sintered [[regolith]] falls into the category of ceramic materials as sintering is the process most common to ceramics.  When bricks are made from clay on Earth, first the bricks are heated long enough and hot enough to drive out the water.  Then the heating is increased to cause partial melting or vitrification which results in the edges of adjacent grains being bonded together once they have cooled.  The unmelted particles provide a stable shape and size during the process which involves some shrinkage and a decrease in porosity.

...

Experiments in radiant heating of regolith simulant have been carried out by NASA Johnson Space Center and Lockheed Engineering &amp; Sciences Co.([[Sintered regolith|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt; --&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f904a7b993d5fe047bb4121d9be62e1374a720f7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1143</id>
    <parentid>1142</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-29T08:20:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tweaking featured article</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1082" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]]===
[[Image:MLS1_Brick.GIF|160px|left]] Sintered [[regolith]] falls into the category of ceramic materials as sintering is the process most common to ceramics.  When bricks are made from clay on Earth, first the bricks are heated long enough and hot enough to drive out the water.  Then the heating is increased to cause partial melting or vitrification which results in the edges of adjacent grains being bonded together once they have cooled.  The unmelted particles provide a stable shape and size during the process which involves some shrinkage and a decrease in porosity.

Experiments in radiant heating of regolith simulant have been carried out by NASA Johnson Space Center and Lockheed Engineering &amp; Sciences Co.([[Sintered regolith|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;!-- &lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt; --&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95459063b374db61119990b91d9f0e6284fa7315</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1144</id>
    <parentid>1143</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:48:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1073" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]]===
[[Image:MLS1_Brick.GIF|160px|left]] Sintered [[regolith]] falls into the category of ceramic materials as sintering is the process most common to ceramics.  When bricks are made from clay on Earth, first the bricks are heated long enough and hot enough to drive out the water.  Then the heating is increased to cause partial melting or vitrification which results in the edges of adjacent grains being bonded together once they have cooled.  The unmelted particles provide a stable shape and size during the process which involves some shrinkage and a decrease in porosity.

Experiments in radiant heating of regolith simulant have been carried out by NASA Johnson Space Center and Lockheed Engineering &amp; Sciences Co.([[Sintered regolith|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>92abe2b7c6266c29cfe4a2899b90e72815374cbf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1145</id>
    <parentid>1144</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:49:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1000" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Sintered regolith]]===
[[Image:MLS1_Brick.GIF|160px|left]] Sintered [[regolith]] falls into the category of ceramic materials as sintering is the process most common to ceramics.  When bricks are made from clay on Earth, first the bricks are heated long enough and hot enough to drive out the water.  Then the heating is increased to cause partial melting or vitrification which results in the edges of adjacent grains being bonded together once they have cooled.  The unmelted particles provide a stable shape and size during the process which involves some shrinkage and a decrease in porosity.

Experiments in radiant heating of regolith simulant have been carried([[Sintered regolith|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>80e3a8ed9a6a671aabcfa72ede461c40bc85099b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1146</id>
    <parentid>1145</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:56:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1218" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]]===
[[Image:Apollo11Soil.jpg|160px|left]] The primary resource of value to humans on the Moon is the volatile components found in the [[regolith]]. These are all the components that are gases at room temperature. Most of the volatiles have been deposited in the top layers of the Moon's surface by the [[solar wind]] over geologic time. A notable exception to this is [[Argon]]. the concentration of Argon in lunar soil is much higher than found in the solar wind, so must come from a different source. Especially, the isotope Argon-40. It is presently believed that the Argon-40 comes from radioactive decay of [[Potassium]] and/or [[Krypton]] deep within the lunar mantle or core, and that the Argon-40 seeps out to the surface via fissures. This vented Argon enter the lunar atmosphere; then the Argon is implanted into the regolith by interactions with ions from the solar wind.([[Volatiles|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2d52d2f83ae6749c50bfbd58c704fe4e1eecadee</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1147</id>
    <parentid>1146</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:56:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1174" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]]===
[[Image:Apollo11Soil.jpg|160px|left]] The primary resource of value to humans on the Moon is the volatile components found in the [[regolith]]. These are all the components that are gases at room temperature. Most of the volatiles have been deposited in the top layers of the Moon's surface by the [[solar wind]] over geologic time. A notable exception to this is [[Argon]]. the concentration of Argon in lunar soil is much higher than found in the solar wind, so must come from a different source. Especially, the isotope Argon-40. It is presently believed that the Argon-40 comes from radioactive decay of [[Potassium]] and/or [[Krypton]] deep within the lunar mantle or core, and that the Argon-40 seeps out to the surface via fissures. This vented Argon enter the lunar atmosphere; then the Argon is implanted into the regolith by([[Volatiles|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e82dcd36ac4f8f70e81aa07adb8b76944205ee9b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1148</id>
    <parentid>1147</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:58:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1091" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]]===
[[Image:Apollo11Soil.jpg|160px|left]] The primary resource of value to humans on the Moon is the volatile components found in the [[regolith]]. These are all the components that are gases at room temperature. Most of the volatiles have been deposited in the top layers of the Moon's surface by the [[solar wind]] over geologic time. A notable exception to this is [[Argon]]. the concentration of Argon in lunar soil is much higher than found in the solar wind, so must come from a different source. Especially, the isotope Argon-40. It is presently believed that the Argon-40 comes from radioactive decay of [[Potassium]] and/or [[Krypton]] deep within the lunar mantle or core, and that the Argon-40 seeps out to the surface via fissures. This vented([[Volatiles|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2d818a0700094a53d48aa01f1609855fdf96bc63</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1149</id>
    <parentid>1148</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-05T11:58:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1017" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]]===
[[Image:Apollo11Soil.jpg|160px|left]] The primary resource of value to humans on the Moon is the volatile components found in the [[regolith]]. These are all the components that are gases at room temperature. Most of the volatiles have been deposited in the top layers of the Moon's surface by the [[solar wind]] over geologic time. A notable exception to this is [[Argon]]. the concentration of Argon in lunar soil is much higher than found in the solar wind, so must come from a different source. Especially, the isotope Argon-40. It is presently believed that the Argon-40 comes from radioactive decay of [[Potassium]] and/or [[Krypton]] deep within the lunar mantle or core([[Volatiles|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b49a3d65722f150b73d78ebca8cee7c30c1eb9cb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Goto exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>104</id>
  <revision>
    <id>299</id>
    <timestamp>2008-06-22T08:41:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>belatedly creating interwiki redicetion template for exodictionary</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="736" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exodictionary.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[exd:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>56fed9133319a4f84bc09acc0406ccb74b7ce66c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Mirrored from space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>129</id>
  <revision>
    <id>414</id>
    <timestamp>2008-06-22T10:09:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tag template for mirrored articles from Exoplatz</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="805" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 60px; height: 60px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|60px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | &lt;SMALL&gt;This article is mirrored from '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
To edit it, please first click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|here]] to go to it.  You will need an account on Exoplatz.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Mirror Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a92c7fd102ae911a7607c6e8b1d93433e8bf270b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>644</id>
    <parentid>643</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-22T14:27:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>test of mirrored article concept</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="228" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>0c774ef98efe92e8ba1c233f006bcadee5c9c573</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>908</id>
    <parentid>907</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T08:43:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>replacing goto tag with mirror of article</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13578" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}
{{Mirrored}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>2ce4c5f11bcf8ce04179be1c33a25f6c8e4342ad</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>909</id>
    <parentid>908</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T08:45:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing template call to say it's being mirrored here</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="13565" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 2]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 3]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| [[Long March 4]]  || Currently in service || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ariane 5]]  || Currently in service || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| [[Ariane 4]]  || Retired || [[Arianespace]] [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| [[GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)]] [[GSLV III]] || Currently in service || [[Indian Space Research Organization]] [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Zenit]] (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || [[Sea Launch]] [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shavit]]  || Currently in service || [[Israeli Aircraft Industries]] [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[H-IIA]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| [[H-IIB]] || Currently in service  || [[Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)]] [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Cosmos-3M]] || Currently in service || [[PO Polyot]] [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| [[Dnepr]] || Currently in service || [[ISC Kosmotras]] [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| [[Molniya]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| [[Volna]] aka [[Priboy/Surf]] || Currently in service || [[SRC Makeyev]] [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| [[Proton]] || Currently in service || [[International Launch Services]] [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| [[Rokot]] || Currently in service || [[EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH]] [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| [[Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz]] || Currently in service || [[Starsem]][http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| [[Start-1]] || Currently in service || [[Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology ]] ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Tsyklon]] || Currently in service || [[PA Yuzhmash]] [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| [[Zenit]] || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Atlas V]]  || Currently in service || [[Lockheed Martin]] [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta II]]  || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Delta IV]] || Currently in service || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[Minotaur]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Pegasus]]  || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Taurus]] || Currently in service || [[Orbital Sciences]] [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Ausroc]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite]] || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Long March 5]]  || in development || [[China Great Wall Industry Corporation]] [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Skylon]]  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Nova 2]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Starchaser Thunderstar]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Vega]] || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Shahab-3]]  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Shahab-4]]  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[Taepodong-2]]  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[KSLV-1]] || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| [[Soyuz 2]]  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| [[Angara]]  || Future Development || [[Khrunichev State Research and Production Center]] [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| [[AERA Altairis]] || Future Development || [[Sprague Astronautics]] [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| [[Ares-1]] ([[Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle]]) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| [[Ares-5]]  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| [[Black Armadillo]] || Future Development || [[Armadillo Aerospace]] [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| [[Dream Chaser]]  || Future Development || [[SpaceDev]] [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon I]]  || Launch Attempted || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Falcon IX]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| [[Galaxy Express GX]] || Future Development || [[Galaxy Express]] [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neptune]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| [[Interorbital Systems Neutrino]] || Future Development || [[Interorbital Systems]] [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| [[Masten XA Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten O Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[Masten XL Series]] || Future Development || [[Masten Space Systems]] [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| [[New Shepard]] || Future Development || [[Blue Origin]] [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| [[Rocketplane XP]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Rocketplane Kistler K-1]] || Future Development || [[Rocketplane Kistler]] [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| [[Scorpius]] || Future Development || [[Scorpius Space Launch Company]] [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| [[Space Adventures Explorer]] || Future Development || [[Space Adventures]] [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;[[Russian Federal Space Agency]] [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipTwo]]  || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceShipThree]] || Future Development || [[Scaled Composites]] [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| [[SpaceX Dragon]] || Future Development || [[SpaceX]] [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| [[TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle]]|| Future Development || [[Tspace T/Space]] [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| [[X-37B]] || Future Development || [[Boeing]] [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| [[XCOR Xerus]] || Future Development || [[XCOR Aerospace]] [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics | AIAA]]; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>30441f6b558b5fd5cb382a6375edf79fb4d508a9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>910</id>
    <parentid>909</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T14:47:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>synchronizing with master version on Exoplatz -- all links converted to interwiki template links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16086" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>be88da645419480c4fc5594c831802d6311118f5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>820</id>
    <parentid>819</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T09:44:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>replacing detour template with mirror</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1797" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*[[Energia]]/[[Buran]] - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999
*[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961
*[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975
*[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973 (see [[lunarp:Apollo|Apollo]])
*[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994
*[[Titan-IV]] -  October 19, 2005
*[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*[[Conestoga]]

===Europe/ELDO===
*[[Europa-II]]

===Russia/USSR ===
*[[N-1]]

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*[[Otrag]] 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*[[Dolphin]]
*[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[spacep:American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company]] ) 
*[[Percheron]] 
*[[X-33]] 

==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[spacep:American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
*[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>a3e83835075bb927b8ff64309f2f127c40cf33a3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>821</id>
    <parentid>820</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T10:05:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* USA */  applying interwiki link template for testing purposes</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1797" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was cancelled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*[[Ariane-4]] - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*[[Black Arrow]] - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*[[Diamant-BP4]] - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*[[Energia]]/[[Buran]] - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*[[Athena-2]] - September 24, 1999
*[[Jupiter-C]] - May 24, 1961
*[[Saturn-1b]] - July 15, 1975
*[[Saturn-V]] - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*[[Scout-G]] - May 9, 1994
*[[Titan-IV]] -  October 19, 2005
*[[Vanguard]] - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*[[Lambda-4]] - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*[[Conestoga]]

===Europe/ELDO===
*[[Europa-II]]

===Russia/USSR ===
*[[N-1]]

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*[[Otrag]] 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*[[Dolphin]]
*[[SET-1 sounding rocket]] (see also [[spacep:American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company]] ) 
*[[Percheron]] 
*[[X-33]] 

==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*[[Burlak]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Maks]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*[[Beal Aerospace BA-2]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Colt]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Black Horse]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Excalibur]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Industrial Launch Vehicle]]  (see also [[spacep:American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company]]) &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Liberty]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Nova]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Phoenix]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Roton]] &lt;br&gt;
*[[Sea Dragon]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Venturestar]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-30]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[X-34]] &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*[[Hotol]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Mustard]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Rombus]] &lt;BR/&gt;
*[[Saenger]] &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>f3415ff251b5a5be00682bd715abdd1492194a89</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>822</id>
    <parentid>821</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T13:14:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>synchronizing with master version on Exoplatz -- all links converted to interwiki template links</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2408" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 

==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>d71838ebf6e3a30e3026751b5ca418d5e8533525</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>384</id>
    <parentid>383</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T10:13:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>modifying to produce a local link when invoked locally</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="401" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}&gt;]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]

'''NOTE:''' This template has been modified to produce a local link, not an interwiki link, when a mirrored article invokes a Lunarpedia article using this template&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d47857f2a0b8920447bfa0163766c773698bdfc1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>385</id>
    <parentid>384</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T10:13:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing stray '&gt;'</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="400" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]

'''NOTE:''' This template has been modified to produce a local link, not an interwiki link, when a mirrored article invokes a Lunarpedia article using this template&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>734f5c6493452ee102210e6c2730348da793e24b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>386</id>
    <parentid>385</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T07:27:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>upgrade</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]

'''NOTE:''' This template has been modified to produce a local link, not an interwiki link, when a mirrored article invokes a Lunarpedia article using this template&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>75f2db0a7c0266fbd48bdb3d00432dcd96eade5a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>127</id>
  <revision>
    <id>404</id>
    <parentid>403</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-23T12:41:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="318" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1}}}|{{{2}}}]][[Image:Mplogo H320 0448 sanstxt.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>04112d0f903ed7b856e5762e60fedc037149810e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>405</id>
    <parentid>404</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T08:24:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>upgrade</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Mplogo H320 0448 sanstxt.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>85ae02afe6127037e1867d629f4c9cdaa42b6fcb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>545</id>
    <parentid>544</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T06:55:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>experiment to simplify template usage</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="373" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Spaceicon H519 0958 link.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>edb30f40c412e7350d7d83f232fa9c83bbfce128</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>546</id>
    <parentid>545</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T06:57:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>success-- adding instruction text for bonus points</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="395" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1|'''Enter Link Here'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Spaceicon H519 0958 link.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>857f8d525285bba4ea03325bf4926b9d157f0dc9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>87</id>
  <revision>
    <id>232</id>
    <parentid>231</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T11:58:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>upgrade</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="316" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exodictionary.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a7e91c38f389f02f09940b807862ddd6f2ee4be</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>539</id>
    <parentid>538</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-06-24T12:16:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>upgrade</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exoproject Rocket Inverted 14px.png]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cd2379ab44ba71964f23894570ac10801f8858c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Mediawiki</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>128</id>
  <revision>
    <id>408</id>
    <timestamp>2008-08-04T09:22:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Emufarmers</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Undo revision 204394 by [[Special:Contributions/59.163.21.134|59.163.21.134]] ([[User talk:59.163.21.134|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/59.163.21.134|contribs]])</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="767" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}

[[Category:Info templates|MediaWiki]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>837244978aea6e95acaa9c122f9e4dd31b4a9a9d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:User Non-domestic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>234</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1310</id>
    <timestamp>2008-08-04T10:58:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #f0f059 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#FFFFFF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#f0f059;text...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="394" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #f0f059 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#FFFFFF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#f0f059;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user prefers non-domestic brew.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>81ac3ccd870b2d2e78f5521cc0735203e590d0ee</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1311</id>
    <parentid>1310</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-04T11:22:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="402" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#FFFFFF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#f0f059;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Brew.png]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user prefers non-domestic brew.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a61a2c3d2734b4c2e6e9a4b9e2a8a1dfdd202025</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>655</id>
    <parentid>654</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-07T15:58:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>We should link to articles about the other wikis just to get these moved articles off of the Dead End article list.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>665</id>
    <parentid>664</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-07T18:09:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>678</id>
    <parentid>677</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-07T18:09:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>716</id>
    <parentid>715</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-08T18:45:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>565</id>
    <parentid>564</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-08-11T00:45:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="533" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct [[User:Jarogers2001/edits/stubs|stub subcategory]].'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>debbf87654565273f70667170d59fae86386bca1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20071016043558|85">
  <title>Template:Land Claims</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>115</id>
  <revision>
    <id>345</id>
    <timestamp>2008-10-12T22:08:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF" |&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt; '''At...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="880" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Attention:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
This article relates to Lunar Land Claims or ownership of Lunar Resources, which are disputed under international treaties and are not recognized by any national or international body.   Unlike earth land claims, "Intent to Occupy" does not currently apply to lunar claims.  The status of claims to lunar resources are not currently enforced and therefore are not likely to be considered valid by any national or international authority.  The views and opinions expressed in this article do not reflect those of Lunarpedia or its supporters.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]][[Category:Law]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8011e7005557a7cbc1b35a0cbcfd70f1eacabfc2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Land Claims</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>115</id>
  <revision>
    <id>346</id>
    <parentid>345</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-12T22:14:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="933" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Attention:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
This article relates to Lunar Land Claims or ownership of Lunar Resources, which are disputed under international treaties and are not recognized by any national or international body.   Unlike earth land claims, "Intent to Occupy" does not currently apply to lunar claims.  The status of claims to lunar resources are not currently enforced and therefore are not likely to be considered valid by any national or international authority.  The views and opinions expressed in this article do not reflect those of Lunarpedia or its supporters.  No endorsement of these claims is given or implied.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]][[Category:Law]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c27a17235e432aa54118c8dc5f082003d92eef1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>347</id>
    <parentid>346</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-16T14:31:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Complete overhaul of template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|[[Image:Leica Lunar Survey.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;'''Lunar Land Claims'''&lt;BR/&gt;
(Scale of estimated claim security pending)
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Land Claims]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d8ce66e2faa576d2ae3b4153df7508f9f12c8958</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>447</id>
    <timestamp>2008-10-16T11:14:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.96.209.216</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reminder tag for no endorsements</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on Lunarpedia is community provided.  Neither Lunarpedia nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f0e316bd704564dfab3fd3d8b563738886fee62e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Controversial Question Series</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>81</id>
  <revision>
    <id>199</id>
    <parentid>198</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-16T13:07:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removing line break</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="719" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Controversial Question 1.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is part of the '''Controversial Question Series'''.  Its purpose is not to come to final answers or even to reach a consensus. It is simply to explore the breadth of opinion in the Lunar development community.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} participating]&lt;/span&gt; in the exploration (or roasting) of this question or proposal.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversial Questions]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50dffe2f72b6354e15a86123645f8eb2e9ba1c1c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:On marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>138</id>
  <revision>
    <id>456</id>
    <timestamp>2008-10-17T06:15:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;" |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt; {| cellspac...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article is located on '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c1ab435d2ae4736b6d49f207ef7746d1d84d9c21</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>457</id>
    <parentid>456</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-17T06:23:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="796" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article is located on '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2458688bdb8cbce7dfcd681f215b05cd46754875</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Goto marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>105</id>
  <revision>
    <id>304</id>
    <parentid>303</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-17T06:21:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="800" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e24df3b024bff562bf0e475f1bba1a4752dafba6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Possibly Obsolete</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>145</id>
  <revision>
    <id>487</id>
    <timestamp>2008-10-26T21:33:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>74.78.252.89</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; {|  | style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is potentially obsolete.  You can h...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="358" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is potentially obsolete.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b10b8b41a418a0d7ffcce3e6026a13d8f5f68340</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>566</id>
    <parentid>565</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-26T22:28:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="520" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct [[Lunarpedia:Stubs|stub subcategory]].'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7f83d2c0334aa27e9d5b628300461f9653618fb7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>213</id>
    <parentid>212</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-26T22:39:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="499" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ccef0ae190f8a5e2cff31c8b7c0df0b6c83f4eeb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>214</id>
    <parentid>213</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-26T22:41:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Removed the stupid fancy L that's soooooooooo annoying.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b3dd3290a805ce48e7df6e1e425301e02ec9a95f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>215</id>
    <parentid>214</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-10-26T22:42:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>removed the width tag that none of the other templates has</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42ad9ff80b1a913c3803e7497c5617ed4ece82d7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Nicetable</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>204</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1164</id>
    <timestamp>2008-10-27T13:32:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>a template to assist in creating nice looking tables</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="486" xml:space="preserve">A workaround for lack of wikitable

&lt;DIV style="border:solid #5F5F5F 1px; background:#EFEFDF; padding:5px 5px 5px 5px; text-align:left;margin-top:5px;"&gt;

&lt;onlyinclude&gt;border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="background:#F7F7F7; border:1px #A0A0A0 solid; border-collapse:collapse"&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;

&lt;/DIV&gt;

To use: 
'''&lt;TT&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}
&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;/TT&gt;'''

Result:
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}</text>
    <sha1>abd050e8792f404a1bf85ebe07b7ac68eeb291e9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Featured article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>203</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1150</id>
    <parentid>1149</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-11-02T05:23:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Jarogers2001</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* &lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Volatiles]] */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1149" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Geologic Processes on the Moon/Cratering on the Moon|Cratering on the Moon]]===
[[Image:GP1Fig_3.jpg|160px|left]] Craters cover the surface of the moon and are the result of hyper-velocity impacts by meteorites. The velocity of meteorites upon impact varies, but is generally between 10 and 40 km/sec. This number is a combination of the ‘approach velocity’ and the ‘escape velocity.’ The approach velocity of objects refers to the velocity of the object with respect to the moon. This varies with the type of object (for example, long period comets generally have a higher approach velocity than short period comets) and the direction with which it approaches the moon (for example, if it approaching the moon ‘head on,’ it will have a higher approach velocity than...([[Geologic Processes on the Moon/Cratering on the Moon|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8c97d656b95fc7cc7e3d2af60106eca652cc7144</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1151</id>
    <parentid>1150</parentid>
    <timestamp>2010-05-11T17:16:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Moon Zoo</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="634" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Moon Zoo]]===
[[Image:Moon Zoo Logo.gif|160px|left]] Moon Zoo is a crowdsourcing project from the Zooniverse community that uses images from the Lunar Reconnasaince Orbiter.

Activities include counting craters, noting blocky craters, and checking relative differences between boulder-producing craters, and...([[Moon Zoo|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>acd9efec6e04fe84dc29672e7a6027cb9ccb6d25</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1152</id>
    <parentid>1151</parentid>
    <timestamp>2010-05-11T17:32:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>sp</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="635" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[Moon Zoo]]===
[[Image:Moon Zoo Logo.gif|160px|left]] Moon Zoo is a crowdsourcing project from the Zooniverse community that uses images from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

Activities include counting craters, noting blocky craters, and checking relative differences between boulder-producing craters, and...([[Moon Zoo|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5db4b5f60dc7b855d30ab55fc5dc27b44a5036c2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1153</id>
    <parentid>1152</parentid>
    <timestamp>2011-09-20T14:06:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>JSC-1</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="948" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[JSC-1]]===
[[Image:EIC050-2.GIF|160px|left]] JSC-1, a lunar soil simulant, was developed and characterized under the auspices of the NASA Johnson Space Center. This simulant was produced in large quantities to satisfy the requirements of a variety of scientific and engineering investigations. JSC-1 is derived from volcanic ash of basaltic composition, which has been ground, sized, and placed into storage. The simulant's chemical composition, mineralogy, particle size distribution, specific gravity, angle of internal friction, and cohesion have been characterized and fall within the ranges of lunar mare soil samples. ...([[JSC-1|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>57c00d3ffb86da84ba40274914e0cebc50106e4e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Mediawiki</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>128</id>
  <revision>
    <id>409</id>
    <parentid>408</parentid>
    <timestamp>2008-11-13T20:22:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision(s)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="767" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}

[[Category:Info templates|MediaWiki]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>837244978aea6e95acaa9c122f9e4dd31b4a9a9d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>410</id>
    <parentid>409</parentid>
    <timestamp>2009-01-19T19:45:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Added examples</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="871" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;

{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Info templates|MediaWiki]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9fa86b87b8e07747876eae826a27bee51a8f7cca</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>411</id>
    <parentid>410</parentid>
    <timestamp>2009-01-19T20:53:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="897" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a1b1a3285932661631b7ac787d8d8a69f4dddcf8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:WikipediaLink</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>173</id>
  <revision>
    <id>615</id>
    <timestamp>2009-01-19T21:03:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New page: {{ #ifeq:   {{SERVERNAME}} | www.wikipedia.org | [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]] | [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}] }}&lt;noinclude&gt; ---- This template links ...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="905" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on wikipedia.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Wikipedia:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Wikipedia, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the wikipedia.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1a10925a93d9bf516ff275992adecef639a3b139</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>911</id>
    <parentid>910</parentid>
    <timestamp>2009-09-15T12:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>75.176.106.229</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16025" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

doors.txt;10;15

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>b9de036b9b862d4321cb15ee3ac1eb35fae64bdf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>912</id>
    <parentid>911</parentid>
    <timestamp>2009-09-15T21:28:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/75.176.106.229|75.176.106.229]] ([[User talk:75.176.106.229|Talk]]) to last revision by [[User:Strangelv|Strangelv]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16086" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>be88da645419480c4fc5594c831802d6311118f5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>913</id>
    <parentid>912</parentid>
    <timestamp>2010-12-09T01:20:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>217.77.222.227</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16434" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

Lacking the technology to build effective warships, the Confederacy attempted to obtain warships from Britain. , &lt;a href="http//members.multimania.nl/ilwinwildsisth/best-porn-videos-.com.html"&gt;best porn videos .com&lt;/a&gt;, [url="http//members.multimania.nl/ilwinwildsisth/best-porn-videos-.com.html"]best porn videos .com[/url], http//members.multimania.nl/ilwinwildsisth/best-porn-videos-.com.html best porn videos .com,  &gt;:),

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a22e40b2eb1ffe3abb362246c2e9ae807b8b3860</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>914</id>
    <parentid>913</parentid>
    <timestamp>2010-12-09T22:23:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>156.99.55.125</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 16024 by [[Special:Contributions/217.77.222.227|217.77.222.227]] ([[User talk:217.77.222.227|Talk]])removing unhelpful edit</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16086" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>be88da645419480c4fc5594c831802d6311118f5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Succession Box</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>211</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1193</id>
    <timestamp>2009-09-19T09:46:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>quick and dirty modification of year box</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="388" xml:space="preserve">&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
| width="30%" |Previous Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{before}}}'''
| width="40%" style="text-align: center;" |'''{{{what}}}&lt;BR/&gt;{{{years}}}'''
| width="30%" |Following Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{after}}}'''
|}
&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8c76686a96a2f0ff4652d21f771ecb11a159d5d3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1194</id>
    <parentid>1193</parentid>
    <timestamp>2009-09-19T10:46:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>correcting before and after box text</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="372" xml:space="preserve">&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
| width="30%" |Before:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{before}}}'''
| width="40%" style="text-align: center;" |'''{{{what}}}&lt;BR/&gt;{{{years}}}'''
| width="30%" |After:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{after}}}'''
|}
&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d0df46c902a1be1b0f55b49569b10ba681a573a8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>209</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1184</id>
    <parentid>1183</parentid>
    <timestamp>2011-03-27T16:29:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.252.190.176</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fixed background</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1900" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0px;margin:0px;font-family:'Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten;filter:progid:dximagetransform.microsoft.emboss"&gt;&lt;!-- emboss is MSIE only, unfortunately, which also means I can't test it from here --&gt;
{| STYLE = "margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px;background:#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "height:8px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; .
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; / &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ~
| 
| 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S&amp;nbsp;A&amp;nbsp;N&amp;nbsp;D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;E&amp;nbsp;G&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;L&amp;nbsp;I&amp;nbsp;T&amp;nbsp;H &amp;nbsp; B&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.       
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;,
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(    
|  
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
| &amp;nbsp;_
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fd3959b72971ee34ede78df0c7fd377b3a46463d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>823</id>
    <parentid>822</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-01-14T15:46:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>63.225.116.202</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2409" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 


==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>8b25662a2990df4ca5e540c02ad81caeb30ad33e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.svg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>178</id>
  <revision>
    <id>629</id>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T04:56:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>630</id>
    <parentid>629</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T04:59:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>uploaded a new version of &amp;quot;[[File:Copyright Review Block.svg]]&amp;quot;</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>631</id>
    <parentid>630</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T05:02:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>uploaded a new version of &amp;quot;[[File:Copyright Review Block.svg]]&amp;quot;</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>177</id>
  <revision>
    <id>626</id>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T05:04:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:Unknown Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>167</id>
  <revision>
    <id>591</id>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T08:31:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Image Licensing Problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="685" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: The licencing terms of this image are not known!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the terms have not been determined after a reasonable abount of time, block or delete this image.&lt;BR/&gt;
*If the image is clearly dubious, block or delet the image immediately.
&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8243250c969e2d060eff30fc7936696525874e0b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>592</id>
    <parentid>591</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-01-20T08:38:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>typos</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="686" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: The licencing terms of this image are not known!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the terms have not been determined after a reasonable amount of time, block or delete this image.&lt;BR/&gt;
*If the image is clearly dubious, block or delete the image immediately.
&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>03c156dfa57d1f1a1b6b69d39bed6d478c31fcba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:User Past NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>237</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1321</id>
    <timestamp>2012-02-25T22:14:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Pjbanyai</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;" | style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#F..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="474" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d240c8c9411207f7ad8649bf17fc61b24033ca23</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Template:User NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>231</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1280</id>
    <parentid>1279</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-02-25T22:14:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Pjbanyai</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1c3756f6d09dce22264fb1b69c8fd4c90248e1a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>761</id>
    <parentid>760</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T06:19:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing link that appears to lead to a virus page or problems</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="575" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}} 

Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>1968f8a74e47ac719570aae4fee83b49dc4b0f52</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>762</id>
    <parentid>761</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T06:23:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>see also</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="625" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}} 

Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
{{stub}}
 
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>e42f89f8f6eab06eb4d614c8fa72c945502279ee</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>929</id>
    <parentid>928</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T06:27:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing link that caused problems, adding see also section</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3126" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt; 
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>959999a2298364cc9c3f6b8dc28bedc97d7ea5d3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>951</id>
    <parentid>950</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T06:54:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing link that caused problems, adding see also</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="576" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
 
{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>2983916793428bdcbc237a61b44ecf621d90c3d7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>679</id>
    <parentid>678</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T14:24:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="665" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors. 

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Business Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>d216c96624c124feda7d70a485f044df1292e2b8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>695</id>
    <parentid>694</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T14:31:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>remove problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="969" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1933, the ''British Interplanetary Society'' (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight.  Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership.  It publishes a technical journal, ''Journal of British Interplanetary Society'', a monthly general interest magazine, ''Spaceflight'', a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, ''Space Chronicle'', and a magazine for children, ''Voyage''.  Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930.  It still exists in the form of the  [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]], following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences.

&lt;BR&gt;
{{Org Stub}}
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;
==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>dfe8358723929a798cf5eeb672a4e7bd6c396e39</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>848</id>
    <parentid>847</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T14:54:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>717</id>
    <parentid>716</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:07:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>705</id>
    <parentid>704</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:08:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>748</id>
    <parentid>747</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:09:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1082</id>
    <parentid>1081</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:10:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>728</id>
    <parentid>727</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:11:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20081012221422|346">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>736</id>
    <parentid>735</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:12:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>772</id>
    <parentid>771</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:13:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>773</id>
    <parentid>772</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:33:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17761 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>774</id>
    <parentid>773</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>656</id>
    <parentid>655</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:14:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>657</id>
    <parentid>656</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:31:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17762 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>666</id>
    <parentid>665</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-12T15:15:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing problem template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="0" xml:space="preserve"></text>
    <sha1>da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>667</id>
    <parentid>666</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-10-22T00:33:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Undo revision 17763 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) replacing link to Exoplatz long after the prblem with the link was fixed.  Better late than never.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1406</id>
    <parentid>1405</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-23T01:27:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>commenting some stuff out</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7204" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Main]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>afbee2711653ea6f22c9e7af76d996953f7beb02</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1407</id>
    <parentid>1406</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-05-23T01:28:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7186" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>778212bced4afb0de568fa4026df2b434378cf3f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1408</id>
    <parentid>1407</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-06-18T23:17:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Sorry about this.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7638" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''NEW ACCOUNT CREATION IS TEMPORARILY DISABLED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;We hope to get things back in order sometime in mid 2014.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Anonymous contributions and existing account logins remain permitted.'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>f7014e6efa5576c9372c147c676e3c6ddc44e188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Template:Userbox FOSS</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>170</id>
  <revision>
    <id>601</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-03T16:48:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>created by Matt D. Harris and originally posted to LPedia.org</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="581" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; 
background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px #000000 solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #9d4654; 
text-align: center; color: white;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''FOSS'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; 
border: 1px #AF0F00 solid; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This person uses '''Free and Open Source Software''' exclusively
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
[[Category:HTML Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31098671f55dba48b27986e33724d7593200cc79</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Template:Userbox Bot</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>169</id>
  <revision>
    <id>598</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-03T16:57:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "&lt;DIV style="float:left;border:solid #0F00BF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt; {| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;" | style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#0..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="float:left;border:solid #0F00BF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#0F00BF;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#FFFFFF" | [[Image:Public Domain robot toy.png|43px]]
| &lt;FONT style="font-size:12pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;"&gt;'''This user is a Bot'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR clear="all"/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>925f9383a2ab3969550041af32f12bd2c4f81279</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Category:HTML Userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>33</id>
  <revision>
    <id>60</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-03T17:07:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "These userboxes are written in pure HTML.  The  original purpose for such templates was to provide compatibility with legacy versions of MediaWiki, but additional, including non-..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="235" xml:space="preserve">These userboxes are written in pure HTML.  The  original purpose for such templates was to provide compatibility with legacy versions of MediaWiki, but additional, including non-Wiki applications may also exist.

[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>84138bf8f202f90128b6ba635a26eb54848b7ae0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Category:Lunarpedia userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>44</id>
  <revision>
    <id>86</id>
    <parentid>85</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-06-03T17:08:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>recategorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>48918277b875bbee57a5597015538dbb57d363d5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Template:Map Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>126</id>
  <revision>
    <id>398</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-14T17:05:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>we didn't have a stub tag for selenographical articles for some reason</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenographical stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d74b78e24bcd9b96d2391cf07006c2980f801ef</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Template:GRX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>93</id>
  <revision>
    <id>258</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-24T22:01:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: ..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="876" xml:space="preserve">background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient( startColorstr='{{{topcolor|#FFFFFF}}}', endColorstr= '{{{botcolor|#EFEFEF}}}', GradientType=0 )
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>76cd24ffb4b2cca5be721c45cfd9cdb21e2f9b8d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>259</id>
    <parentid>258</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-06-24T22:11:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Why is this broken?</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%)
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>28d6aa8af172f78f02ab3dd8a2ca1b320d0355bb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Template:RBX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>147</id>
  <revision>
    <id>495</id>
    <timestamp>2012-06-24T22:02:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "border:1px {{{border|#3F3F3F}}} solid; background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1218" xml:space="preserve">border:1px {{{border|#3F3F3F}}} solid; background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient( startColorstr='{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}', endColorstr= '#EFEFEF', GradientType=0 ); -webkit-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -moz-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -khtml-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; -opera-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -webkit-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; -moz-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6eda3837cbc92e6a9ff88caf29dc0b881cb7eb07</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>496</id>
    <parentid>495</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-06-24T22:18:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Ripping the MSIE support that doesn't work anyway worked for GRX so...</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1084" xml:space="preserve">border:1px {{{border|#3F3F3F}}} solid; background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); -webkit-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -moz-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -khtml-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; -opera-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -webkit-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; -moz-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32ec49776c9f1bafa1fc0b1cd089192b42447cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>737</id>
    <parentid>736</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:35:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17760 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>738</id>
    <parentid>737</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>729</id>
    <parentid>728</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:37:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17759 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>730</id>
    <parentid>729</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>8 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1083</id>
    <parentid>1082</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:39:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17758 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1084</id>
    <parentid>1083</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>749</id>
    <parentid>748</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:41:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17757 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>750</id>
    <parentid>749</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>706</id>
    <parentid>705</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:43:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17756 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>707</id>
    <parentid>706</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>718</id>
    <parentid>717</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:48:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17755 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>719</id>
    <parentid>718</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>849</id>
    <parentid>848</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:52:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17752 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>850</id>
    <parentid>849</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>23 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>696</id>
    <parentid>695</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:54:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17750 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>697</id>
    <parentid>696</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>12 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>680</id>
    <parentid>679</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T15:56:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17749 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>681</id>
    <parentid>680</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>952</id>
    <parentid>951</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T16:04:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17738 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>953</id>
    <parentid>952</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>930</id>
    <parentid>929</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T16:06:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Undo revision 17735 by [[Special:Contributions/Farred|Farred]] ([[User talk:Farred|talk]]) restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>931</id>
    <parentid>930</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>763</id>
    <parentid>762</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-07-07T16:10:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>restoring old version now that the Exoplatz link is clean</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>764</id>
    <parentid>763</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1110</id>
    <parentid>1109</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-09-06T23:38:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>71.162.156.242</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "tether is cool. actually idk what it is"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">tether is cool. actually idk what it is</text>
    <sha1>5c4055bee29311ed07632e3ec80993737e22f0e6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1111</id>
    <parentid>1110</parentid>
    <timestamp>2012-09-07T05:39:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Farred</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Restoring previous Exoplatz link</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Main Page</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>4</id>
  <revision>
    <id>920</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T05:24:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MediaWiki default</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="535" xml:space="preserve">&lt;strong&gt;MediaWiki has been successfully installed.&lt;/strong&gt;

Consult the [//meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.

== Getting started ==
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]</text>
    <sha1>48ae6e35148eb82b1c8ad85ab548f97ca752999a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>921</id>
    <parentid>920</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:07:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>restoring main page from http://web.archive.org/web/20120915132802/http://www.exoplatz.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&amp;action=edit</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11113" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>9fa1b708c399600350c967f592b7fb37fe49303c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>Home</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>1</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1371</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T05:24:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MediaWiki default</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="535" xml:space="preserve">&lt;strong&gt;MediaWiki has been successfully installed.&lt;/strong&gt;

Consult the [//meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.

== Getting started ==
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]</text>
    <sha1>48ae6e35148eb82b1c8ad85ab548f97ca752999a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1372</id>
    <parentid>1371</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:07:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>restoring main page from http://web.archive.org/web/20120915132802/http://www.exoplatz.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&amp;action=edit</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11113" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>9fa1b708c399600350c967f592b7fb37fe49303c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20120512151338|772">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>940</id>
    <parentid>939</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>658</id>
    <parentid>657</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>659</id>
    <parentid>658</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:31:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to most recent surviving version (12 May 2007); removing migration template; minor formatting changes</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1453" xml:space="preserve">An '''ablating material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

It should be noted that use of ablating material for heat shields has two significant drawbacks:  first, the mass of the material must either be carried throughout the mission (at an attendant penalty to payload capacity) or must be installed immediately before reentry (adding greatly to complexity and raising safety concerns if, for whatever reason, the installation fails) and, second, the coating is a single-use component, making it unattractive as an option on reusable vehicles.

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

{{Physics Stub}}

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>9e64c2763fb52d5176219f5a6ec8e668a9b539c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>668</id>
    <parentid>667</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}

Moved to [[Exoplatz]].</text>
    <sha1>f2a15691348eb252bb8be3071b7953ea7e4f0188</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>669</id>
    <parentid>668</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:16:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to most recent surviving version: 26 April 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="956" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}

{{Autostub}}
{{Initial Proof Needed}}
'''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac'''
 
&lt;BR/&gt;An annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category:NASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>ede1c9bfd6a6f3f5e7000798b594039790dd0e93</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>670</id>
    <parentid>669</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:17:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>formatting; removing unneeded templates</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="903" xml:space="preserve">
The '''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac''' is an annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category:NASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>1fecb07f8d44011e23c84880345ca650189f40e4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1112</id>
    <parentid>1111</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>22 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14" xml:space="preserve">{{Goto space}}</text>
    <sha1>296c77a9f212641061cb96cc9af3d831ba70fda8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1113</id>
    <parentid>1112</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:14:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>pasting in most recent surviving version: 28 December 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1718" xml:space="preserve">A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]

[http://spacetethers.com http://spacetethers.com]


{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>6725b5b18a2282a0a3a1d12d958b35aae69d8b96</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Goto space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>107</id>
  <revision>
    <id>314</id>
    <parentid>313</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:11:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: importing surviving older versions of articles from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="729" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>de99849cc4a6f040d00835eaed1345582b3ca545</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>MediaWiki:Sidebar</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>5</id>
  <revision>
    <id>39</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:26:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "*Navigation **mainpage|mainpage **Category:Main|Browse **helppage|help **List of Lists|Needed Articles **Exoplatz:Sandbox|Sand Box **recentchanges-url|recentchanges **randompa..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="349" xml:space="preserve">*Navigation
**mainpage|mainpage
**Category:Main|Browse
**helppage|help
**List of Lists|Needed Articles
**Exoplatz:Sandbox|Sand Box
**recentchanges-url|recentchanges
**randompage-url|randompage
**Special:Search|Search
*Interwiki
**lunarp:Main_Page|Lunarpedia
**marsp:Main_Page|Marspedia
**exd:Main_Page|ExoDictionary
**sf:Main_Page|Scientifiction.org</text>
    <sha1>e0e99ee2ef85f166b2b36fa04247bb514444e78d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>954</id>
    <parentid>953</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T06:56:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to Lunarpedia version of 12 May 2012</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="576" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}
A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
 
{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>2983916793428bdcbc237a61b44ecf621d90c3d7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>955</id>
    <parentid>954</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:01:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing migration template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="561" xml:space="preserve">A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
 
{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>780090911d7bd6f77013c670a681183a525a2244</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>682</id>
    <parentid>681</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:05:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to most recent surviving version (12 May 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="679" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Business Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>e1857240ba9a093fceb48aa4f693102ec2df7771</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>683</id>
    <parentid>682</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:05:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing migration template</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="664" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by [[James C. Bennett|Jim Bennett]], the '''American Rocket Company''', or '''AMROC''', was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 [[Hybrid rocket|hybrid rocket motor]] test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at [[NASA]]'s [[Stennis Space Center]]'s E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the [[Industrial Launch Vehicle]] (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the [[SET-1]] [[sounding rocket]] was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995.  Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by [[SpaceDev]], and its lineage is part of [[SpaceShipOne]].

{{Business Stub}}
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>8d470795ed205ef50a8a15c407581940e46489bd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>765</id>
    <parentid>764</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:07:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to most recent surviving version (29 March 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="574" xml:space="preserve">{{Move2space}}

Inverted Aerobraking - a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>35f3b043863d9245e417d5ff83604510d9736d56</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>766</id>
    <parentid>765</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:08:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removed migration template; formatting</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="565" xml:space="preserve">'''Inverted Aerobraking''' is a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>d653b1ea2195e1d242653a2eaae97ff8b20a233c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>851</id>
    <parentid>850</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:12:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to most recent surviving version (20 February 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1198" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] deep ocean floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a5cae85afd7246526ae4d88b9ec02c07b976bfa8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>941</id>
    <parentid>940</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:39:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>applying most recent surviving version (28 December 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1326" xml:space="preserve">== NASA-003, NASA-008 ==

Two specially-modified Boeing B-52 heavy bombers, with eight jet engines in 4 clusters of two, two of these clusters slung beneath each wing. A special hanging "cradle" was added beneath the starboard wing, between the inboard engine cluster and the fuselage. Used to launch X-15 rocketplanes (some of whose pilots flew high enough to earn their astronaut wings), to launch lifting bodies, and to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  One of these aircraft, tail number NASA-003 (retired 1969), is on public display at the Pima Air &amp; Space Museum near Tucson, AZ. See: http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm [http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm Boeing NB-52A 'Stratofortress' SN: 52-0003].

NASA-008 first flew in 1955 June 11 and was retired on 2004 December 17. See:  http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html B-52B "Mothership" Launch Aircraft]

The "mothership" idea continues to be used, most recently by the winner of the X-Prize, SpaceShip One, and followup craft. There is also a rumored secret Air Force space plane project, commonly referred to as "Aurora", which may also use a "mothership" configuration (if it exists).

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Boosters]]</text>
    <sha1>590fb09a9a7b40f66797cf1fd3f590bb2b78b6c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>708</id>
    <parentid>707</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:46:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to most recent surviving complete version (23 April 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="542" xml:space="preserve">The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Inst Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>756f4fad0e0ef3c672031b0c54275db0e75f2e0c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>751</id>
    <parentid>750</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:49:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to last Lunarpedia revision (7 May 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="882" xml:space="preserve">The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] is being held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme is 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Pending}}
{{Event Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect.


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>9643189a1bde00e95f88d126a840e967a7582605</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>752</id>
    <parentid>751</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:51:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>minimal changes appropriate to this being a historical event</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="874" xml:space="preserve">The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] was held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme was 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Event Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


&lt;!-- ==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect. --&gt;


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>8090af75f9cedff50db54a75f2343e56860b256f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1085</id>
    <parentid>1084</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:53:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to most recent surviving version (17 Feb 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="428" xml:space="preserve">The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop 
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 

Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007 

Cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

Sponsor: [[Space Engineering and Science Institute]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>ff439765d24a818729a210d71294775b9ffc9245</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1086</id>
    <parentid>1085</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T07:54:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>farmatting changes appropriate to this being a historical event</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA  was held on Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007. 

It was cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

Sponsor: [[Space Engineering and Science Institute]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>78baa788f5c654eaca8589ee0cd6d92eb7100ddb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>775</id>
    <parentid>774</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:10:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to most recent surviving version (18 February 2007)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="272" xml:space="preserve">The larger of two government space research agencies in Japan.

Sponsors the [[SELENE]] lunar orbiter spacecraft as well as the [[H-IIA]] and [[H-IIB]] launch vehicles, and module for the [[International Space Station|ISS]]

[[Category:Organizations]]
[[Category:Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ba2840a8cfb12964a8c546a26210380509b59fda</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>739</id>
    <parentid>738</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:12:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to Lunarpedia version of 16 February 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="300" xml:space="preserve">The Annual gathering of the National Space Society, usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend.  Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have been in Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia.

[[International Space Development Conference 2007]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>e7e084596b19ca6e2ffc399c726a145fa9bdf8ae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>731</id>
    <parentid>730</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:13:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to Lunarpedia version of 2 February 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="132" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

Cosponsored by [[IEEE]] and [[AIAA]]

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>da422a999c186227a27684cb6e3f0cf2fb475e49</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>720</id>
    <parentid>719</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:15:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>reverting to Lunarpedia version of 2 February 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="149" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>1bc110786856c8fe5757116148b6704366f0c296</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>698</id>
    <parentid>697</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:16:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to Lunarpedia version of 19 April 2007; removing migration tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="969" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1933, the ''British Interplanetary Society'' (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight.  Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership.  It publishes a technical journal, ''Journal of British Interplanetary Society'', a monthly general interest magazine, ''Spaceflight'', a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, ''Space Chronicle'', and a magazine for children, ''Voyage''.  Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930.  It still exists in the form of the  [[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]], following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences.

&lt;BR&gt;
{{Org Stub}}
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;
==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS
&lt;BR&gt;
&lt;BR&gt;

[[Category:Organizations]]</text>
    <sha1>dfe8358723929a798cf5eeb672a4e7bd6c396e39</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>785</id>
    <parentid>784</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:56:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>8 revisions</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1254" xml:space="preserve">{{move2space}}
The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{Inst Stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>7e361f43c2f89aef44f590332e8c03469a998d92</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>786</id>
    <parentid>785</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T08:57:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing migration template.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1239" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{Inst Stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>446fd39a7ca50affa7dfa08db1272e916f50eeb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>932</id>
    <parentid>931</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:22:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to Lunarpedia version of 6 February 2007</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3061" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>70380bf84781f6391053640e5c74435086dc5ba7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>List of Lists</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>193</id>
  <revision>
    <id>918</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:24:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Applying most recent surviving version (30 July 2012)</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="662" xml:space="preserve">The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of needed articles. Please to not hesitate to add list ideas to this list or article ideas to the appropriate lists linked to from here.

...or start the article or work on improving an existing article... 

*[[List of Scientific Missions]]
*[[List of Galaxies]]
*[[List of Planets]]
*[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]
*[[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]
*[[List of Comets]]
*[[List of Nebulae]]
*[[List of Constellations]]
*[[List of Stars]]


[[Category:Bootstrap Lists]]</text>
    <sha1>5dcc5bb924267dc2abadbd0a9dd1f5a133781bde</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>824</id>
    <parentid>823</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:28:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>36 revisions: Applying mirrored files from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2409" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 


==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>8b25662a2990df4ca5e540c02ad81caeb30ad33e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>825</id>
    <parentid>824</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:35:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing mirrored from here tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2384" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 


==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>6459e7bd82c227f5139acadd81648cfeafe3f101</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>645</id>
    <parentid>644</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:28:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: Applying mirrored files from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="228" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>0c774ef98efe92e8ba1c233f006bcadee5c9c573</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>646</id>
    <parentid>645</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:34:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing mirrored from here tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="203" xml:space="preserve">The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>ee0b0c436eaff1e4d24d7df74c7f85c14124a8df</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>915</id>
    <parentid>914</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:33:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Applying mirrored files from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16086" xml:space="preserve">{{Mirrored from space}}

=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>be88da645419480c4fc5594c831802d6311118f5</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>916</id>
    <parentid>915</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:36:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing mirrored from here tag</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16061" xml:space="preserve">=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ab40900ccf1e0af7a8df07c767aa83c38eadc97b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Category:HTML Userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>33</id>
  <revision>
    <id>61</id>
    <parentid>60</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="235" xml:space="preserve">These userboxes are written in pure HTML.  The  original purpose for such templates was to provide compatibility with legacy versions of MediaWiki, but additional, including non-Wiki applications may also exist.

[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>84138bf8f202f90128b6ba635a26eb54848b7ae0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Userbox Bot</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>169</id>
  <revision>
    <id>599</id>
    <parentid>598</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="float:left;border:solid #0F00BF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#0F00BF;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#FFFFFF" | [[Image:Public Domain robot toy.png|43px]]
| &lt;FONT style="font-size:12pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;"&gt;'''This user is a Bot'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR clear="all"/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>925f9383a2ab3969550041af32f12bd2c4f81279</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Userbox FOSS</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>170</id>
  <revision>
    <id>602</id>
    <parentid>601</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="581" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; 
background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px #000000 solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #9d4654; 
text-align: center; color: white;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''FOSS'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; 
border: 1px #AF0F00 solid; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This person uses '''Free and Open Source Software''' exclusively
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
[[Category:HTML Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31098671f55dba48b27986e33724d7593200cc79</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Category:Lunarpedia userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>44</id>
  <revision>
    <id>87</id>
    <parentid>86</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>48918277b875bbee57a5597015538dbb57d363d5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>159</id>
    <parentid>158</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>8 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="654" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; was used while a protection mechanism made this tag otherwise uneditable --&gt;
{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Autostubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a0cc01e9050896292a509cd5b1ecac0bd0d02327</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Cleanup</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>77</id>
  <revision>
    <id>183</id>
    <parentid>182</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e91b61716b442a064ced5b90802907f2962d9fa2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>216</id>
    <parentid>215</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
This List has no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42ad9ff80b1a913c3803e7497c5617ed4ece82d7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:PD Violation</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>141</id>
  <revision>
    <id>471</id>
    <parentid>470</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="886" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: This article may have content that is not in the public domain!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the problem content can be identified, please remove it immediately!
*If not already relocated, this article should be moved outside of the main namespace.
*If the content can not be identified, rewrite this article from scratch with the assumption that the entire article is in someone else's copyright.  Upon completion of such a rewrite, delete this article.&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d4628753d11cd711a087d3124571f19e3c5e92e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>527</id>
    <parentid>526</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fce308332aac7aefe379e3799203b320cca73382</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>567</id>
    <parentid>566</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="520" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct [[Lunarpedia:Stubs|stub subcategory]].'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7f83d2c0334aa27e9d5b628300461f9653618fb7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Test Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>163</id>
  <revision>
    <id>576</id>
    <parentid>575</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="520" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;!-- Real autostub will include stub category link(s) here --&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>55126b3e7e3a4a8ba96da7212457ba9f823a437f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Unencyclopedic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>166</id>
  <revision>
    <id>588</id>
    <parentid>587</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article may not have sufficiently encyclopedic formatting or tone.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or reworking ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e0db0c5934dccae079abeb3653ae0bc9ea5b20e8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706061126|658">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>608</id>
    <parentid>607</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="559" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:300px"&gt;
{| style="width:300px"
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center;width=300px" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>416e83326f5bfed16cc7120a3970c2df146cda73</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Wikipedia</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>172</id>
  <revision>
    <id>613</id>
    <parentid>612</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="672" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''WP'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from [http://wikipedia.org Wikipedia].&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Wikipedia Based Articles]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles derived from Wikipedia.

[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cc34e93fb039b3b17b0903aa046fc3d5ed1fef92</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Initial Proof Needed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>113</id>
  <revision>
    <id>338</id>
    <parentid>337</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This autostub has not yet had its initial copyediting proof.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Initial Proof Needed]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5c8a2083b9d269504dee973c943062c13efb283a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Pending</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>143</id>
  <revision>
    <id>478</id>
    <parentid>477</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is about a pending event, and the information here is prone to change or obsolescence.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Pending Events]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f970ac0aa0d0172188e297ddd401e29159dcc78d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Reference Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>149</id>
  <revision>
    <id>505</id>
    <parentid>504</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="567" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This [[:Category:References|reference]] article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f228c594a79ea28e3840f52d036a73bcaa436a9d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Unknown Terms</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>168</id>
  <revision>
    <id>596</id>
    <parentid>595</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="503" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This terms under which this image is available for use are unknown.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} identifying]&lt;/span&gt; them or deleting or marking for deletion this image.'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unknown Term Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31ba2ec45aedff407dccea02ffc526f2bff23b66</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Controversial</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>80</id>
  <revision>
    <id>195</id>
    <parentid>194</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help Lunarpedia by helping to resolve the issue in this article's &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversies]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a253de8c344f4e93cbfc7913fc8a7a888f0976a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Physics Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>144</id>
  <revision>
    <id>484</id>
    <parentid>483</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="440" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7e911aaa01a5833830dd5be57eaf40b894e0e47d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Move2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>134</id>
  <revision>
    <id>440</id>
    <parentid>439</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="322" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Scientifiction]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0e786f9d8a1823f83c0ca2eee73f6cdadd174fb3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Move2marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>133</id>
  <revision>
    <id>435</id>
    <parentid>434</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="308" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#7F0000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Marspedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Marspedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f661fdd6e7b63655f9fd30f7de009f6299e1bb40</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Move2lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>132</id>
  <revision>
    <id>430</id>
    <parentid>429</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="310" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#3F3F3F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Lunarpedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Lunarpedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>181c4b459d2944dee02c8ad499ba3ad44954c5fa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Move2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>135</id>
  <revision>
    <id>445</id>
    <parentid>444</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to the Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to General Space]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ba9c521979e95a9005ca22032fe3e84e4eef1645</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Business Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>75</id>
  <revision>
    <id>173</id>
    <parentid>172</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="439" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a business stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Business Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0622437d8894500feefe03f9b4f6c586ae2d88f5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Chem Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>76</id>
  <revision>
    <id>177</id>
    <parentid>176</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="441" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a chemistry stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Chemistry Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b6f134f221081c44831ef95a6120fa2e8394aa20</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Life Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>122</id>
  <revision>
    <id>379</id>
    <parentid>378</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a life support stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Life Support Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50156f60fa2cdd13b68d068b440e7b2e125a2cfb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Move2exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>131</id>
  <revision>
    <id>425</id>
    <parentid>424</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="319" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f5331008328435c1396334aa83d7e45764bc0cb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Ref Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>148</id>
  <revision>
    <id>500</id>
    <parentid>499</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a reference stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Reference Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>71904c7d0e77f988b696970bc30914e350a29568</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Subminimal</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>162</id>
  <revision>
    <id>571</id>
    <parentid>570</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="466" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:5pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article has no or virtually no content.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} adding]&lt;/span&gt; something to it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Subminimal Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>03351211529163865b119242c00d5e868372c8b2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Dev Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>83</id>
  <revision>
    <id>208</id>
    <parentid>207</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a development stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Development Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5d1ba93aacf628b21ada2c0dbcd58daf605eca6d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Help Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>108</id>
  <revision>
    <id>317</id>
    <parentid>316</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="431" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a help stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Help Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41d3bcccee0c976cd5898fc05dfffa0d1f9d6529</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Hist Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>109</id>
  <revision>
    <id>321</id>
    <parentid>320</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="440" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a history stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ec8f4be8650eebf520606c1cfdcfd92a3f4bcb4f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Infra Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>112</id>
  <revision>
    <id>334</id>
    <parentid>333</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an infrastructure stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Infrastructural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a445e4591e0d1297150b464419ba4f3f3dcc170e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Trans Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>164</id>
  <revision>
    <id>580</id>
    <parentid>579</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a transportation stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>80a980acd4d149b0044d258bfd815dd9516fbbfb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Biog Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>73</id>
  <revision>
    <id>163</id>
    <parentid>162</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a biographical stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41db9aa30993c6b179096a866406e4128b86dce9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Org Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>140</id>
  <revision>
    <id>465</id>
    <parentid>464</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an organizational stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Organizational Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>45d8878ba0e20739130809d482b1c56f75d2726e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Agri Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>71</id>
  <revision>
    <id>148</id>
    <parentid>147</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an Agricultural stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Agricultural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e706929e64b5525c70938ceb12bb1940feb14de6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Selene Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>155</id>
  <revision>
    <id>530</id>
    <parentid>529</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenological stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenological Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cf5a34e8280e412fc669c208805f59ad6fcb2c43</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Settle Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>156</id>
  <revision>
    <id>534</id>
    <parentid>533</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="443" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a settlement stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Settlement Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7d35cd9444aa176a5d690bee49e2cc658f867da4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Maint Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>125</id>
  <revision>
    <id>395</id>
    <parentid>394</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a site maintenance stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Maintenance Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>be682a09a09f7f54ad3b1ea3973493b5b06d3b36</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Expand</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>88</id>
  <revision>
    <id>239</id>
    <parentid>238</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete or needs more information.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0771dfa415192375ca082916d2e4776bbbbd90d5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Expandsec</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>89</id>
  <revision>
    <id>244</id>
    <parentid>243</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="473" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomplete or needs more detail.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand Section]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c0a8621c0ae3475a2f9869faf7d2cc4d26454afd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Historical Essay</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>110</id>
  <revision>
    <id>326</id>
    <parentid>325</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="610" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"&gt; 
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"
|[[Image:Apollo_09_David_Scott_podczas_lotu_Apollo_9_GPN-2000-001100.jpg|100px]]
|&lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a [[Oral_Histories_List|Historical Essay]]&lt;BR/&gt; Written and submitted by&lt;BR/&gt; {{{Author}}}.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}


&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Essays]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Essay Templates]]
[[Category:History Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41545287697e690a56dd9b68768f72466a18e3e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Debate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>82</id>
  <revision>
    <id>205</id>
    <parentid>204</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a topic of debate. &lt;BR/&gt; Please feel free to  &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} jump in]&lt;/span&gt; with a constructive contribution.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>04d956935778f91a2877011bebd18fa6817381e6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>250</id>
    <parentid>249</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Bootstrap</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>74</id>
  <revision>
    <id>169</id>
    <parentid>168</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="562" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Bootstrap lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b374207ac3126a20d03569066b7f48ecb2e8da00</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Inst Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>114</id>
  <revision>
    <id>342</id>
    <parentid>341</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an institutional stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Institution Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a0ab7666d1c139efe9cdc59c3f57e96a7fee532c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Space Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>158</id>
  <revision>
    <id>551</id>
    <parentid>550</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a space stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a9d633abb3c8e8e07c7ad4029dfeb71f5fcd58a8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Inappropriate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>111</id>
  <revision>
    <id>330</id>
    <parentid>329</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="375" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this article is not appropriate for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Inappropriate]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3c5a957eee3fd4e3f3ef36d2d4789485aecdc964</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Launch Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>116</id>
  <revision>
    <id>352</id>
    <parentid>351</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a launch system stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Launch System Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e705e54addbb6d2d6b835e0ba6a3bba610edcd9b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Offtopic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>137</id>
  <revision>
    <id>452</id>
    <parentid>451</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="368" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this article is not on topic for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>edeb2f2c98520bb70503feec438fa45c2f723f39</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Undescribed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>165</id>
  <revision>
    <id>584</id>
    <parentid>583</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="462" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This category lacks a description.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} providing]&lt;/span&gt; one.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Undescribed Categories]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;!-- [[Category:Stub Templates]] --&gt;
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1df2af667053e7347095e30b96b1a66ab7a58cd6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Event Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>86</id>
  <revision>
    <id>224</id>
    <parentid>223</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="437" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an event stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Event Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ed1fe13e31a54d305a1576ad4ca3a48a523b903e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Mission Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>130</id>
  <revision>
    <id>418</id>
    <parentid>417</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a mission or probe stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Mission and Probe Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7fe8c3d26b51e4c919ec67c3a9946e9a0f278675</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Resource Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>151</id>
  <revision>
    <id>513</id>
    <parentid>512</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a resource stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Resource Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32295e4c2d217c572e03a055143823f4da166893</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Controversial Question Series</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>81</id>
  <revision>
    <id>200</id>
    <parentid>199</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="719" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Controversial Question 1.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is part of the '''Controversial Question Series'''.  Its purpose is not to come to final answers or even to reach a consensus. It is simply to explore the breadth of opinion in the Lunar development community.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} participating]&lt;/span&gt; in the exploration (or roasting) of this question or proposal.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversial Questions]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>50dffe2f72b6354e15a86123645f8eb2e9ba1c1c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Still Coming Together</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>160</id>
  <revision>
    <id>558</id>
    <parentid>557</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="299" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 2px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Still Coming Together.png|96px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFFFFF;font-size:16pt;"&gt; This Lunarpedia Feature is still coming together.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>71ccaf40524545a62db4e54e89968813dd99fe6d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Goto sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>106</id>
  <revision>
    <id>309</id>
    <parentid>308</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="738" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Scientifiction.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[sf:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.


[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d1005472edb3027bc4caecf4fbcce0504906f6c5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Eng Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>85</id>
  <revision>
    <id>220</id>
    <parentid>219</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="446" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an engineering stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Engineering Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dee2b5ef5e2ea20bd5be19b0a8da8d99f7102f57</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Fork2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>91</id>
  <revision>
    <id>253</id>
    <parentid>252</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="342" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>709ea17830819087686e5d8078022613a6f7dda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Fork2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>92</id>
  <revision>
    <id>256</id>
    <parentid>255</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="334" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f76363264f4ea12034093c8aa01445c7b48eaa1a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094419|613">
  <title>Template:Goto marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>105</id>
  <revision>
    <id>305</id>
    <parentid>304</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="800" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e24df3b024bff562bf0e475f1bba1a4752dafba6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Online Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>139</id>
  <revision>
    <id>461</id>
    <parentid>460</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an online resource or community stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Online Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a48e2f118adee59d29b420b8cbd9803a22a7c05b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Comm Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>79</id>
  <revision>
    <id>190</id>
    <parentid>189</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a communications stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Communications Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>7dba4f949517458621b049101577ec7d9ab333dd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Pub Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>146</id>
  <revision>
    <id>492</id>
    <parentid>491</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a book or publication stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Publication Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f868ee2478c49d586364f249992b83c13c557c4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Cleanup Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>78</id>
  <revision>
    <id>187</id>
    <parentid>186</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this section has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>634c5fbab801a2660df65136d7ed3a61dcdb4ca4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:MMM</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>124</id>
  <revision>
    <id>392</id>
    <parentid>391</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;includeonly&gt;[[Category:Moon Miners' Manifesto based articles]]&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2952cef88792eb54d67b8dde5c3b58c9c5039d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Remove to list</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>150</id>
  <revision>
    <id>509</id>
    <parentid>508</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="507" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A Lunarpedia editor believes that this subminimal stub should be listed as an entry in a bootstrap list and temporarily removed.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;If any amount of useful content is added here, please remove this tag. 
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Remove to Bootstrap List]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4f905b67e29fedea9ea45bc319ce112f18863ef1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Spec Melt</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>159</id>
  <revision>
    <id>555</id>
    <parentid>554</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="320" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This specification is being reevaluated or is in need of replacement'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e88d91770ea3fb8d1b1278629fd9d1d50c78e45c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Rough</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>153</id>
  <revision>
    <id>520</id>
    <parentid>519</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:7pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This page is full of rough and unformatted information or ideas.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} working it into an article]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c333fe6678bd86eff933cb4bff2d1ee05dc803d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Goto exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>104</id>
  <revision>
    <id>300</id>
    <parentid>299</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="736" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exodictionary.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[exd:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>56fed9133319a4f84bc09acc0406ccb74b7ce66c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Mirrored from space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>129</id>
  <revision>
    <id>415</id>
    <parentid>414</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="805" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 60px; height: 60px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|60px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | &lt;SMALL&gt;This article is mirrored from '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
To edit it, please first click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|here]] to go to it.  You will need an account on Exoplatz.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Mirror Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a92c7fd102ae911a7607c6e8b1d93433e8bf270b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Land Claims</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>115</id>
  <revision>
    <id>348</id>
    <parentid>347</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="390" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|[[Image:Leica Lunar Survey.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;'''Lunar Land Claims'''&lt;BR/&gt;
(Scale of estimated claim security pending)
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Land Claims]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d8ce66e2faa576d2ae3b4153df7508f9f12c8958</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>448</id>
    <parentid>447</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on Lunarpedia is community provided.  Neither Lunarpedia nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f0e316bd704564dfab3fd3d8b563738886fee62e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:On marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>138</id>
  <revision>
    <id>458</id>
    <parentid>457</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="796" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article is located on '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2458688bdb8cbce7dfcd681f215b05cd46754875</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Possibly Obsolete</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>145</id>
  <revision>
    <id>488</id>
    <parentid>487</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="358" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is potentially obsolete.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b10b8b41a418a0d7ffcce3e6026a13d8f5f68340</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Mediawiki</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>128</id>
  <revision>
    <id>412</id>
    <parentid>411</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="897" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a1b1a3285932661631b7ac787d8d8a69f4dddcf8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:WikipediaLink</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>173</id>
  <revision>
    <id>616</id>
    <parentid>615</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="905" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on wikipedia.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Wikipedia:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Wikipedia, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the wikipedia.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1a10925a93d9bf516ff275992adecef639a3b139</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.svg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>178</id>
  <revision>
    <id>632</id>
    <parentid>631</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Unknown Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>167</id>
  <revision>
    <id>593</id>
    <parentid>592</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="686" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: The licencing terms of this image are not known!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the terms have not been determined after a reasonable amount of time, block or delete this image.&lt;BR/&gt;
*If the image is clearly dubious, block or delete the image immediately.
&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>03c156dfa57d1f1a1b6b69d39bed6d478c31fcba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>177</id>
  <revision>
    <id>627</id>
    <parentid>626</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Map Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>126</id>
  <revision>
    <id>399</id>
    <parentid>398</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="453" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenographical stub.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d74b78e24bcd9b96d2391cf07006c2980f801ef</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:GRX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>93</id>
  <revision>
    <id>260</id>
    <parentid>259</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%)
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>28d6aa8af172f78f02ab3dd8a2ca1b320d0355bb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:RBX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>147</id>
  <revision>
    <id>497</id>
    <parentid>496</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1084" xml:space="preserve">border:1px {{{border|#3F3F3F}}} solid; background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); -webkit-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -moz-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -khtml-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; -opera-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -webkit-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; -moz-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32ec49776c9f1bafa1fc0b1cd089192b42447cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>98</id>
  <revision>
    <id>278</id>
    <parentid>277</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="707" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3901efcd588c1e4d0ed079c826ed91cfc6cbb952</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>99</id>
  <revision>
    <id>282</id>
    <parentid>281</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="723" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cb208176a4ef007d845bae2baf5cdfa37865f35f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>100</id>
  <revision>
    <id>286</id>
    <parentid>285</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="702" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cf9c333884370fd7bbb9ffe49af5778e09fb8c08</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>101</id>
  <revision>
    <id>289</id>
    <parentid>288</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="718" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6010b87cd480d7e8381ba5474a09f8ab22765624</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>94</id>
  <revision>
    <id>263</id>
    <parentid>262</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="710" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95cd78fb2d29b39017341c1614babd0983f90603</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>95</id>
  <revision>
    <id>266</id>
    <parentid>265</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>47e9eee7f978eff1cb587f64cc64a6d3a80ddfdb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>102</id>
  <revision>
    <id>293</id>
    <parentid>292</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="711" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ffb8c361f57c42a488093eaec6aab0b701f4afad</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>103</id>
  <revision>
    <id>297</id>
    <parentid>296</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:44:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5fec2070785c1274d33204d3ad03fb826b8d03d6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>96</id>
  <revision>
    <id>270</id>
    <parentid>269</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="701" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d011ccaeac24c0c7db4e59bcd53e58d7015924c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>97</id>
  <revision>
    <id>274</id>
    <parentid>273</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="717" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6101e07ffe24823ffb1cbc49868cb13b1a9e2945</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:License-Any Attributive</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>118</id>
  <revision>
    <id>363</id>
    <parentid>362</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="840" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Attribution'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of any attributive license selected by the Moon Society.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have attribution for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate license.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dd2762ca9b6fa86b2a942a061d9c71a8d4c08068</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:License-GFDL</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>119</id>
  <revision>
    <id>367</id>
    <parentid>366</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="834" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''GFDL'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the GNU Free Document License .&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles such as those derived from Wikipedia.  Not recommended for new articles, as it may result in their removal once a license policy is determined unless another, compatible license option is also available.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9dbf9d26c5f7bbed8c56eedc8dfcfec0d08926a3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:License-Sharealike</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>121</id>
  <revision>
    <id>376</id>
    <parentid>375</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="884" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Sharealike'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all modifications are free under the terms of any viral or share-alike license selected by the Moon Society, unless this template is removed.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have viral attributes for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate licensing option.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c69f42d7b851afed7c7ef6df400dcdbb927801ab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:License-Public Domain</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>120</id>
  <revision>
    <id>372</id>
    <parentid>371</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="808" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#D7FFBF"&gt;'''Public Domain'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all articles and their revisions in the main namespace are released to the Public Domain and can be used when attribution or sharing of changes are not feasible.  Articles in in other namespaces, such as GFDL and CC Lunar are NOT released to the Public Domain.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
All Rights Released

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95af88b9b574c69b0e3045396f1a56eab0e5ad2b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:License-Any</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>117</id>
  <revision>
    <id>358</id>
    <parentid>357</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="910" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F"&gt;'''?'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the as yet undetermined default license or licenses.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is obsolete as of the decision to segregate content into three separate namespaces and should not be used.  For content that you do not care about the license, put the article in the main namespace where it will be released to the public domain.

[[Category:License templates]]
[[Category:Obsolete Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e6ed7707be325921b9ce18745e7185b26ac734e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:PD notice</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>142</id>
  <revision>
    <id>475</id>
    <parentid>474</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="color:#000000; border:solid 1px #A8A8A8; padding:0.5em 1em 0.5em 0.7em; margin:0.5em 0em; background-color:#FFFFFF;font-size:90%; vertical-align:middle;"&gt;
[[Image:PD-icon.svg|20px|left]]'''Important note:''' When you edit this text, you agree to release your contribution in the public domain&lt;!-- [[w:Public domain|public domain]] --&gt;. If you don't want this, please don't edit. 
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:License templates|PD notice]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d28c2ed6ddd9909eb5cf6727218e4ec00ca406e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>87</id>
  <revision>
    <id>233</id>
    <parentid>232</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="316" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exodictionary.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a7e91c38f389f02f09940b807862ddd6f2ee4be</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>127</id>
  <revision>
    <id>406</id>
    <parentid>405</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Mplogo H320 0448 sanstxt.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>85ae02afe6127037e1867d629f4c9cdaa42b6fcb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>547</id>
    <parentid>546</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="395" xml:space="preserve">[[spacep:{{{1|'''Enter Link Here'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Spaceicon H519 0958 link.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>857f8d525285bba4ea03325bf4926b9d157f0dc9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>540</id>
    <parentid>539</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exoproject Rocket Inverted 14px.png]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cd2379ab44ba71964f23894570ac10801f8858c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>387</id>
    <parentid>386</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]

'''NOTE:''' This template has been modified to produce a local link, not an interwiki link, when a mirrored article invokes a Lunarpedia article using this template&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>75f2db0a7c0266fbd48bdb3d00432dcd96eade5a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Restricted Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>152</id>
  <revision>
    <id>517</id>
    <parentid>516</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:45:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision: Templates from Lunarpedia; some may need adjustment</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="307" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
|- style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" 
| {| 
| [[Image:Warning Sign.png|64px]]
| This image is available under restrictive terms.  Please ensure that they are adhered to.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:License tags]]</text>
    <sha1>ae073185b0cf771be142c8fc744606fe3debe5a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>160</id>
    <parentid>159</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:50:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="656" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; was used while a protection mechanism made this tag otherwise uneditable --&gt;
{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Autostubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77dcc37dcc2eeaf234957beb6adb16f98be8ed5d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Cleanup</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>77</id>
  <revision>
    <id>184</id>
    <parentid>183</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:51:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>10af88b42fa4c66806305839f02e0716b5009f41</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>217</id>
    <parentid>216</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:51:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
This List has no content.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a9f44959e1873468917a6c69f95be4fae2c3dcd3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>568</id>
    <parentid>567</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:52:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="522" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct [[Lunarpedia:Stubs|stub subcategory]].'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6e9e17ee54a2960c5f97608a2ae4d3c61f023811</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Test Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>163</id>
  <revision>
    <id>577</id>
    <parentid>576</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:52:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="522" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;!-- Real autostub will include stub category link(s) here --&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5412fa0e98bfa92f8947af1b00079130755baff4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706094441|461">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>609</id>
    <parentid>608</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:53:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="561" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:300px"&gt;
{| style="width:300px"
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center;width=300px" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8cbb83002e6366878d93e8c9cdd459bac36ac2cc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Unencyclopedic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>166</id>
  <revision>
    <id>589</id>
    <parentid>588</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:53:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="470" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article may not have sufficiently encyclopedic formatting or tone.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or reworking ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2ed1f751ba2b24af3743da1bc0cf03ed4e81932a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Pending</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>143</id>
  <revision>
    <id>479</id>
    <parentid>478</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:54:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is about a pending event, and the information here is prone to change or obsolescence.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Pending Events]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4ce4d5801c8b074b953a3818a0cfee0ef6606cbf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Reference Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>149</id>
  <revision>
    <id>506</id>
    <parentid>505</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:55:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="569" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This [[:Category:References|reference]] article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b97207aee7f6aba50393691c7c8b7a6c51a4020e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Physics Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>144</id>
  <revision>
    <id>485</id>
    <parentid>484</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:55:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ee0f209e046f3cf77f9d2e1393f3c45a15ad3af5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Controversial</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>80</id>
  <revision>
    <id>196</id>
    <parentid>195</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:56:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="496" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by helping to resolve the issue in this article's &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversies]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d0e32f817e2ecce7e2f9b5268c3d79e647e96912</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Subminimal</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>162</id>
  <revision>
    <id>572</id>
    <parentid>571</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:56:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:5pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article has no or virtually no content.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} adding]&lt;/span&gt; something to it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Subminimal Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>133422e0edc56eb3c6fbffc545c361f73d37abd5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Ref Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>148</id>
  <revision>
    <id>501</id>
    <parentid>500</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:57:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="446" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a reference stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Reference Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e0132bbc737da08f430931bab2b658b16b3a076e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Life Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>122</id>
  <revision>
    <id>380</id>
    <parentid>379</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T09:57:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a life support stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Life Support Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c126957d593a6ade9a0af50d06372c42033bc58</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Controversial Question Series</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>81</id>
  <revision>
    <id>201</id>
    <parentid>200</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:02:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Adapting for Exoplatz</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="721" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Controversial Question 1.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is part of the '''Controversial Question Series'''.  Its purpose is not to come to final answers or even to reach a consensus. It is simply to explore the breadth of opinion in the space development community.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} participating]&lt;/span&gt; in the exploration (or roasting) of this question or proposal.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversial Questions]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ee292e1f04b9b04da2f750246a191c06658487b1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Land Claims</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>115</id>
  <revision>
    <id>349</id>
    <parentid>348</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:05:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>removing Lunar from text</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="384" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|[[Image:Leica Lunar Survey.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;'''Land Claims'''&lt;BR/&gt;
(Scale of estimated claim security pending)
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Land Claims]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ce65db0ab018256329eaa319af347f956669392c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>388</id>
    <parentid>387</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:13:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>adjusting for use here</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:LunarpediaLogoH512 43.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;

----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>07e996db42854a0520f63900581394d4a2d68163</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>548</id>
    <parentid>547</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:13:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>adjusting for use here</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c704173fcfb0fa9c3748fe379028dc97f0ce9392</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Business Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>75</id>
  <revision>
    <id>174</id>
    <parentid>173</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:15:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="441" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a business stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Business Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a1aed91795f8e44daa8671412d327930c75750c1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Chem Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>76</id>
  <revision>
    <id>178</id>
    <parentid>177</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:15:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="443" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a chemistry stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Chemistry Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>35598950decc6a1e842e153fae5536cb808b2a5e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Help Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>108</id>
  <revision>
    <id>318</id>
    <parentid>317</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:16:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="433" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a help stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Help Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>977a37fb15ed65968790a0cf945e4f854a43ed93</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Hist Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>109</id>
  <revision>
    <id>322</id>
    <parentid>321</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:16:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a history stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>60a0f6258321f02b60dfb8396c3ef2277f44c41f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Dev Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>83</id>
  <revision>
    <id>209</id>
    <parentid>208</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:16:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a development stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Development Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41930747c5a24b190348631823e2d4b5a09f535a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Trans Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>164</id>
  <revision>
    <id>581</id>
    <parentid>580</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:16:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a transportation stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b3ade4ddc505eaae6f6d52d6fe5ba139fa5fca28</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Infra Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>112</id>
  <revision>
    <id>335</id>
    <parentid>334</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:16:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an infrastructure stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Infrastructural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f8e4d8c884cc062dcee9969e37b67df7b04bddd8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Org Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>140</id>
  <revision>
    <id>466</id>
    <parentid>465</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an organizational stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Organizational Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bf72b30d941ec30a546d450665c92676d5b75073</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Biog Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>73</id>
  <revision>
    <id>164</id>
    <parentid>163</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a biographical stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1d266311d0debd6e182e1d7d15ac06294aa3745c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Settle Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>156</id>
  <revision>
    <id>535</id>
    <parentid>534</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a settlement stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Settlement Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f1490ab991fd3633a6bd2f126d117f1d1e642499</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Selene Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>155</id>
  <revision>
    <id>531</id>
    <parentid>530</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="451" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenological stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenological Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6371e081983f61fe62ceda866fc6b6c486b7abfe</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Agri Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>71</id>
  <revision>
    <id>149</id>
    <parentid>148</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an Agricultural stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Agricultural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b9e4f1ca45650538fa419fecb160b164d7319509</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Maint Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>125</id>
  <revision>
    <id>396</id>
    <parentid>395</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a site maintenance stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Maintenance Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bd5920562c075613f7b1c06fd0bf8d7b04097943</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Expand</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>88</id>
  <revision>
    <id>240</id>
    <parentid>239</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:17:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete or needs more information.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>630d94b63394ef0849c3085ef2f63686fe85b7f1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Expandsec</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>89</id>
  <revision>
    <id>245</id>
    <parentid>244</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomplete or needs more detail.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand Section]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b76dca4c829b3b4e5b735bce141b2b96be6f8550</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Space Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>158</id>
  <revision>
    <id>552</id>
    <parentid>551</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a space stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5ece8ec97e62d88df98b864d3a9ff44f53de62b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Inst Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>114</id>
  <revision>
    <id>343</id>
    <parentid>342</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an institutional stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Institution Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>078ea9e7ff36f6590ded0e407f5994bb322880ea</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Launch Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>116</id>
  <revision>
    <id>353</id>
    <parentid>352</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a launch system stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Launch System Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>da7f5f6af6f22dbc46368009244e6e6e8167b7c6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Undescribed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>165</id>
  <revision>
    <id>585</id>
    <parentid>584</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="464" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This category lacks a description.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} providing]&lt;/span&gt; one.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Undescribed Categories]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;!-- [[Category:Stub Templates]] --&gt;
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a2499d6dfbbfaa028f91d3a6d8881e0259b28520</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Offtopic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>137</id>
  <revision>
    <id>453</id>
    <parentid>452</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:18:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="370" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this article is not on topic for Lunarpedia.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8ce295c1e579689db574dc4204bcc65cc5bd8524</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>454</id>
    <parentid>453</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="372" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this article is not on topic for {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>10a1133b98e1b84221c49de8ba124ef28a222efb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Inappropriate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>111</id>
  <revision>
    <id>331</id>
    <parentid>330</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="379" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this article is not appropriate for {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Inappropriate]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>02618803c3d31769b5dc1de7ca4f138a0ff0d43b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Resource Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>151</id>
  <revision>
    <id>514</id>
    <parentid>513</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a resource stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Resource Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9352a14f13fa15ea82142180457f3a4313c0324d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Mission Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>130</id>
  <revision>
    <id>419</id>
    <parentid>418</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a mission or probe stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Mission and Probe Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>deb26e05e707d8729823c44fc9279bcbf4171340</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Event Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>86</id>
  <revision>
    <id>225</id>
    <parentid>224</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="439" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an event stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Event Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2f301131d7e587e659622c9bab314b47681cb9aa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Eng Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>85</id>
  <revision>
    <id>221</id>
    <parentid>220</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:19:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an engineering stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Engineering Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cab9d7392ae85236b34d8465da237b7e74774976</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Online Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>139</id>
  <revision>
    <id>462</id>
    <parentid>461</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:20:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="460" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an online resource or community stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Online Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>57862629552ce6365dea5dccb138b151ff009e8f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Pub Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>146</id>
  <revision>
    <id>493</id>
    <parentid>492</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:20:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a book or publication stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Publication Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d503b1b6b9a1ec6a1339dda19e4c7f90017a3f1f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Comm Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>79</id>
  <revision>
    <id>191</id>
    <parentid>190</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:20:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a communications stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Communications Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>33d2ded9637446c895a32c3eb337ffc62183c2de</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Remove to list</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>150</id>
  <revision>
    <id>510</id>
    <parentid>509</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:20:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="509" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this subminimal stub should be listed as an entry in a bootstrap list and temporarily removed.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;If any amount of useful content is added here, please remove this tag. 
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Remove to Bootstrap List]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a32f6855b9d2d713782bdcf3dfc92f933b88ba8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>449</id>
    <parentid>448</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:21:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on {{SITENAME}} is community provided.  Neither {{SITENAME}} nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fbf47935b25f7c3ab8baa3c0d5246c2d93d6ccab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Possibly Obsolete</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>145</id>
  <revision>
    <id>489</id>
    <parentid>488</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:21:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{SITENAME}}</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="360" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is potentially obsolete.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f0b5d54296435ee41dabaed9b41785f3cf1664f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>File:Apollo 09 David Scott podczas lotu Apollo 9 GPN-2000-001100.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>175</id>
  <revision>
    <id>622</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:28:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>[[David Scott]] during the [[Apollo 9]] mission

Public domain NASA image

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Photos]]
[[Category:Public Domain Photos]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="162" xml:space="preserve">[[David Scott]] during the [[Apollo 9]] mission

Public domain NASA image

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Photos]]
[[Category:Public Domain Photos]]</text>
    <sha1>2993d0f3e54b60002ae75c36affec9b976b18761</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>File:Bootstrap1.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>176</id>
  <revision>
    <id>624</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:30:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>{{PD-self}}

Pulling up by a literal bootstrap

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="80" xml:space="preserve">{{PD-self}}

Pulling up by a literal bootstrap

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]</text>
    <sha1>fabd64b1dcceb343f34b1eb1f40c5953f2b1dd7f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>File:Still Coming Together.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>181</id>
  <revision>
    <id>638</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:32:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Warning: Still Coming Together

2007 James Gholston

Heck with it.  Releasing to the public domain.

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]
[[Category:Template icons]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="161" xml:space="preserve">Warning: Still Coming Together

2007 James Gholston

Heck with it.  Releasing to the public domain.

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]
[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>b0f0bc63b43d49b5fe95173cdb903c1c145c9bee</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>File:Exoplatz.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>179</id>
  <revision>
    <id>634</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:36:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>This is the temporary logo for Exoplatz, the general space wiki.

[[Category:Template icons]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="93" xml:space="preserve">This is the temporary logo for Exoplatz, the general space wiki.

[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>c50dd840e5c1c2b8f34d432571be13c2f80b1f1c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Template:Map Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>126</id>
  <revision>
    <id>400</id>
    <parentid>399</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T10:40:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Planetographical</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a planetographical stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Planetographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>604b56d79e818c60f5bbc5fd0ffa81a053e2980a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706095352|589">
  <title>Category:Exoplatz</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>32</id>
  <revision>
    <id>58</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:17:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="104" xml:space="preserve">This is the category for direct pieces of wiki infrastructure, such as the main page.

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>124273e6e35799ba99a5393c219292ed0b52f2c5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Main</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>45</id>
  <revision>
    <id>89</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:19:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="106" xml:space="preserve">This is the base category.  Everything should be linked to from here.  Browse away!

[[Category:Exoplatz]]</text>
    <sha1>14a08fa983f675c73823ccd6190f172f09cc4cb1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Chemistry</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>27</id>
  <revision>
    <id>48</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:22:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categocy</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Conferences</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>28</id>
  <revision>
    <id>50</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:22:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:History</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>34</id>
  <revision>
    <id>63</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:23:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Images</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>36</id>
  <revision>
    <id>67</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:23:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Institutions</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>39</id>
  <revision>
    <id>73</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:24:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Organizations</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>48</id>
  <revision>
    <id>95</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:27:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Pending Events</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>49</id>
  <revision>
    <id>97</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:28:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:People</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>50</id>
  <revision>
    <id>99</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:28:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Research Centers</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>56</id>
  <revision>
    <id>115</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:29:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Rocketry</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>57</id>
  <revision>
    <id>117</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-06T11:29:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Sysop</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Undescribed Categories</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>65</id>
  <revision>
    <id>134</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:32:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>maintenance category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="80" xml:space="preserve">These category pages lack a description.  Just saying.

[[Category:Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>6419389cc248ad001af87b6a73754a9f8c0b0750</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>135</id>
    <parentid>134</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:44:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>renaming category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="85" xml:space="preserve">These category pages lack a description.  Just saying.

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>1a8eb31329e91ef01876a43eb269a6e96f857c52</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Template:Bootstrap</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>74</id>
  <revision>
    <id>170</id>
    <parentid>169</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:34:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="562" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Bootstrap Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5f33c12a0c54f8327e063cfc8bd6f21ab017a4fc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Bootstrap Lists</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>25</id>
  <revision>
    <id>43</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:35:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>capitalization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}  

[[Category:Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>4dc6de75f37bfb0d109e22923fa5ed8a52801629</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>44</id>
    <parentid>43</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:44:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>renaming category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="48" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}  

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>47d21730105964d6749a14219e8b4cffce7ca251</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Tag Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>60</id>
  <revision>
    <id>123</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:37:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Violation Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>69</id>
  <revision>
    <id>143</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:41:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>62</id>
  <revision>
    <id>128</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:43:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>8a176325a812900010d88e49030983ff66b36cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Wiki Maintenance</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>70</id>
  <revision>
    <id>145</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:43:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Text Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>64</id>
  <revision>
    <id>132</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:45:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Test Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>63</id>
  <revision>
    <id>130</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:46:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Attribution Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>24</id>
  <revision>
    <id>41</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:46:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Interwiki Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>40</id>
  <revision>
    <id>75</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:46:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:License templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>43</id>
  <revision>
    <id>81</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:47:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:User templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>67</id>
  <revision>
    <id>139</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:47:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Stub Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>58</id>
  <revision>
    <id>119</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:48:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:License tags</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>42</id>
  <revision>
    <id>79</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:49:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Stub Templates</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>197</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1088</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T09:51:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Organizational Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>47</id>
  <revision>
    <id>93</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:07:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Infrastructural Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>37</id>
  <revision>
    <id>69</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:07:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Event Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>31</id>
  <revision>
    <id>56</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:07:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Physics Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>52</id>
  <revision>
    <id>104</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:07:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Business Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>26</id>
  <revision>
    <id>46</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:08:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Launch System Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>41</id>
  <revision>
    <id>77</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:08:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Institution Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>38</id>
  <revision>
    <id>71</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:08:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "{{Undescribed}}  [[Category:Stub Templates]]"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Subminimal Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>59</id>
  <revision>
    <id>121</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:08:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Template icons</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>61</id>
  <revision>
    <id>125</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:10:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="35" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]</text>
    <sha1>0afc414152b6b3b5d349defbebfbf50127750a86</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Images</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>54</id>
  <revision>
    <id>109</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:10:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="35" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]</text>
    <sha1>0afc414152b6b3b5d349defbebfbf50127750a86</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Photos</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>55</id>
  <revision>
    <id>112</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:10:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="35" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]</text>
    <sha1>0afc414152b6b3b5d349defbebfbf50127750a86</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>113</id>
    <parentid>112</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:15:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Photos</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>51</id>
  <revision>
    <id>101</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:10:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="35" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]</text>
    <sha1>0afc414152b6b3b5d349defbebfbf50127750a86</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>102</id>
    <parentid>101</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:15:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Icons</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>53</id>
  <revision>
    <id>106</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:11:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="35" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]</text>
    <sha1>0afc414152b6b3b5d349defbebfbf50127750a86</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>107</id>
    <parentid>106</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:15:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>68</id>
  <revision>
    <id>141</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:12:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>625f70b045b59d1e71d15462a973b499f57bac44</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:User Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>66</id>
  <revision>
    <id>137</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:12:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Essay Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>30</id>
  <revision>
    <id>54</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:13:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:History Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>35</id>
  <revision>
    <id>65</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:13:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140706111915|89">
  <title>Category:Obsolete Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>46</id>
  <revision>
    <id>91</id>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:13:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Images</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>54</id>
  <revision>
    <id>110</id>
    <parentid>109</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:15:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Category:Template icons</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>61</id>
  <revision>
    <id>126</id>
    <parentid>125</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-07-07T10:15:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>fix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images][</text>
    <sha1>e4ef3da872e0af87205e861c7737c767bf32487f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Space Based Solar Power</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>2</id>
  <revision>
    <id>957</id>
    <timestamp>2014-10-05T02:55:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power  == Economics of Solar Power Satellites ==  test"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="144" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

== Economics of Solar Power Satellites ==

test</text>
    <sha1>37c9ef2244d9799f99bf2d34c1f406b70f6d78e4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>958</id>
    <parentid>957</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-05T18:54:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Economics of Solar Power Satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1338" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here I assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.</text>
    <sha1>6e9180674ed579ee4b74ba71498489121e59c0c3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>959</id>
    <parentid>958</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-05T19:01:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1365" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here I assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>13408f9a05455950fd434c3b1c481953a8ab58a3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>960</id>
    <parentid>959</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-09T02:35:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1385" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here I assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>befd2b0f42aa836dd59301b833169abf2de2d517</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>961</id>
    <parentid>960</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-28T04:33:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2313" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here I assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spread sheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>e98e2f0b1f372789669871288becb86f69f03714</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>962</id>
    <parentid>961</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-28T05:06:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2311" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spread sheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>365199dc4a0ec6401fec940c10b3c95187170bcf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>963</id>
    <parentid>962</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-10-30T03:44:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Economics of Solar Power Satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2379" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate commodity.

That means close attention to cost.

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spread sheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>8591d6b1413ef4a78b658439fefa223593171c16</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>964</id>
    <parentid>963</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-11-05T03:56:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Economics of Solar Power Satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3147" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That would be expected to make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity is unstable.  A better way is "design to cost" where the target is low enough cost to get a large market share.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spread sheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>7550ec3c8914a7771159782bbe437b96ef993b83</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>965</id>
    <parentid>964</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-11-08T08:44:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Economics of Solar Power Satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3179" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That would be expected to make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity is unstable.  A better way is "design to cost" where the target is low enough cost to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spread sheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>185762a525a4619f3a0013c9c9b563dc86419886</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>966</id>
    <parentid>965</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-11-12T16:20:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Mass of power satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3178" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Economics of Solar Power Satellites =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That would be expected to make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity is unstable.  A better way is "design to cost" where the target is low enough cost to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>d196aa54ead170185ff950e0933989d022a1d276</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>967</id>
    <parentid>966</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-12-08T06:12:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3194" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictable over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>1cedbd4fe25b1c70185a75f1b8126c944ce00b63</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>968</id>
    <parentid>967</parentid>
    <timestamp>2014-12-19T00:22:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3194" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 7 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>e257a3ad7fcc9345c809a60052c999efacbe8dd1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>969</id>
    <parentid>968</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-04-25T21:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Mass of power satellites */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3196" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>2a3752ab5419c9f0f1b93ecfc2da647379ff1394</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>970</id>
    <parentid>969</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-04-26T01:45:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Strangelv moved page [[Space based solar power]] to [[Space Based Solar Power]]: capitalization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3196" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

== Mass of power satellites ==

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>2a3752ab5419c9f0f1b93ecfc2da647379ff1394</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>971</id>
    <parentid>970</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-05-03T23:41:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3422" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state corporation commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

= PS Types =


== PV ==


== Thermal ==

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.
		
= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Ground transmitter ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>38c8efaf6e20f5bc0568445a3ebd208124e1458b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>972</id>
    <parentid>971</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-06-25T14:22:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3418" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

= PS Types =


== PV ==


== Thermal ==

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.
		
= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Ground transmitter ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>813e6d6d9b7f4156ad9cdf4ef1f09a94c79ae8a1</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>973</id>
    <parentid>972</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-06-25T15:14:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* PS Types */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="4691" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Ground transmitter ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>f91a91dd3f56d5d5342924b00b2f4786e188f3a0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>974</id>
    <parentid>973</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-06-25T18:51:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="4834" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Ground transmitter ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>3c1ee06001532034ab3574a06ecd149270a2adb4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>975</id>
    <parentid>974</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-06-25T18:55:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5019" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Ground transmitter ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>697867a301cc55d9ee26e26217c3c1ab6f671459</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>976</id>
    <parentid>975</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-07-25T23:22:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5027" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>ed1178ac758de1c26adba83aa119eba4edb8241d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>977</id>
    <parentid>976</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-07-25T23:40:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5050" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>c6b520e1ac27f95640d8eb0ccede149d4cea54d0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>978</id>
    <parentid>977</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-14T00:50:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Earth to LEO */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5560" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport =

== Earth to LEO ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or maybe TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

== Skylon ==

== SpaceX ==

== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>c123597e96ec0b5f366f053cbb59061afaad0cfb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>979</id>
    <parentid>978</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-14T02:18:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5656" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations (Mass) ==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>2c8d41eb73b823e11f872079272b4a32c04a5da2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>980</id>
    <parentid>979</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-14T02:44:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Common considerations (Mass) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5990" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

== Common considerations ==

=Mass=
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

=Energy transmission loss=

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>f538421660c736aca59fd71cbb5d731797d0fa42</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>981</id>
    <parentid>980</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-14T02:47:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="5992" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>0266276c1ed859c1609de81a19be9993d654b46a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>982</id>
    <parentid>981</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-14T04:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy transmission loss */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7581" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind cosmic ray shielding.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>b729b2f49f4f591999a6475c432ca5e6c3997ea0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>983</id>
    <parentid>982</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T02:39:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy transmission loss */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9041" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn about 82 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~86 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~7 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 7 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 49 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 3400 kWh/kW

Such analysis as has been done to date indicates that they will have an exceptionally short payback time, two or three months.  They are not hard to calculate since most of the cost and energy is going into lifting parts to space.  It takes around 7 kg of parts to send a kW of power (full time) to the earth.  Each kg of parts takes about 5 kg of LH2 for fuel and electric engine reaction mass at 70 kWh/kg, making the energy cost to install a kW of new power from space about 2400 kWh.  So the energy payback time after turning the power satellite on would be around three months.

==EROEI==

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind cosmic ray shielding.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>b28d9141465b895776dd936038e574c30a5db491</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>984</id>
    <parentid>983</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T11:57:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="8710" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 2400 kWh/kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI==

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind cosmic ray shielding.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>ec9596768f04ed04624760cbf7862af4ddb31c85</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>985</id>
    <parentid>984</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T12:42:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* EROEI */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9164" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same. 

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 2400 kWh/kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind cosmic ray shielding.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>329377414a360d5dde870b6b6aab2e2216bb1e26</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>986</id>
    <parentid>985</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T12:44:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Thermal */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9174" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 2400 kWh/kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind cosmic ray shielding.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>709118b3e13ae5a3f78c57ed0258a3d9d200b4cb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>987</id>
    <parentid>986</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T12:47:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Reliability */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9195" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 2400 kWh/kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


== LEO to GEO ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>5a2e1530f0e7bb2cf4525e6e6eeb165a896f1d19</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>988</id>
    <parentid>987</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T12:49:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* LEO to GEO */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9193" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore 2400 kWh/kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>194073a271958c16446354169ff02642c04159ac</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>989</id>
    <parentid>988</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-08-15T18:01:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9197" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>d52ecf0948180bcfd41a4b737c270853a29d507e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>990</id>
    <parentid>989</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-09T05:08:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Common considerations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9215" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It's got to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>4c0e99c72f9ab090176c44562d42855d3d854220</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>991</id>
    <parentid>990</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-11T04:16:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* SpaceX */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9219" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>260ad649f6134bd4f04eeb4a95c071c17f474469</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>992</id>
    <parentid>991</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-11T22:23:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* LEO to GEO */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9237" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>794e2aba7192bfec52632556eb478c791bd45adb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>993</id>
    <parentid>992</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-11T22:31:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Space Junk */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9913" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>cf7c1a8f170b4a53b182aca254d3289d78328115</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>994</id>
    <parentid>993</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-11T22:32:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* SpaceX */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9918" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

The current model has this split out as $200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), $900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and $1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>9f39384fb26a5f14bde6dced7dae4d2adfec9a64</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>995</id>
    <parentid>994</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-14T01:48:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="9957" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the hydrogen

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO will take 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh perkW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to LH2 that they can be ignored.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>722bd4fa17757abb5e6a76eaa5400640c01b9a61</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>996</id>
    <parentid>995</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-16T23:47:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11886" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite come from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is right on.

====Skylon====

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO must include 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh per kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>e043891f87a4f7f4e3098feade131d81d94e2de7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>997</id>
    <parentid>996</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-16T23:48:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11887" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is right on.

====Skylon====

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO must include 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh per kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>4ddfafece6c68b01695950725dd489c5f53e8515</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Category:Earth Orbit</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>29</id>
  <revision>
    <id>52</id>
    <timestamp>2014-10-05T19:03:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>new category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="109" xml:space="preserve">Things and phenomena that exist or take place at least primarily in Earth Orbit.  Or will.

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>576a247f8666d11e84b37e773407c1a6ab268dda</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1409</id>
    <parentid>1408</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-03-17T03:19:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7638" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''NEW ACCOUNT CREATION IS TEMPORARILY DISABLED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;We hope to get things back in order sometime by mid 2015.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Anonymous contributions and existing account logins remain permitted.'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>60c9c9efefd29e5afb363e22698152d8caf4623e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Main Page</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>4</id>
  <revision>
    <id>922</id>
    <parentid>921</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-04-14T16:57:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>minor change to force the caching situation to go away</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11120" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   

&lt;!--
Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
--&gt;

Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>59299c1e77780062ffd3a7017e41957a4b77ac8d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Home</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>1</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1373</id>
    <parentid>1372</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-04-14T16:57:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>minor change to force the caching situation to go away</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11120" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   

&lt;!--
Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
--&gt;

Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>59299c1e77780062ffd3a7017e41957a4b77ac8d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>User:Strangelv</title>
  <ns>2</ns>
  <id>174</id>
  <revision>
    <id>620</id>
    <timestamp>2015-04-25T20:25:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>quick copy/paste/edit from Lunarpedia</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="610" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--
{| style="align: right; float: right; border: 0px" cellspacing = 0
|{{User Past Director}}
|-
|{{User 3 Digit}}
|-
|{{User Sysop}}
|-
|{{User Server Admin}}
|-
|} --&gt;

'''James Gholston''' is Moon Society secretary and has been involved with the Artemis and Moon Societies since 1999 and was appointed to fill an unexpired term on the Board of Directors in 2006, serving until the end of the 2007-2009 term.

He presently serves as a sysop for [http://lpedia.org LPedia], as vice chair of the Denton County LP, and as the District 30 representative on the [http://lptexas.org/state-leadership Texas SLEC].</text>
    <sha1>e1a34b97999c4ae4d63edd4af37d8009c1b24c33</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Template:Nicetable</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>204</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1165</id>
    <parentid>1164</parentid>
    <timestamp>2015-04-30T16:49:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>tinkering</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="487" xml:space="preserve">A workaround for lack of wikitable

&lt;DIV style="border:solid #5F5F5F 1px; background:#EFEFDF; padding:5px 5px 5px 5px; text-align:left;margin-top:5px;"&gt;

&lt;onlyinclude&gt;border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="background:#F7F7F7; border:1px #A0A0A0 solid; border-collapse:collapse;"&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;

&lt;/DIV&gt;

To use: 
'''&lt;TT&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}
&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;/TT&gt;'''

Result:
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}</text>
    <sha1>b912dcec250924a94d2e2273fff24628b7c75dd7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20140707101550|110">
  <title>Index.php</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>188</id>
  <revision>
    <id>741</id>
    <timestamp>2015-07-18T15:29:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Redirecting to main page</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="23" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Main Page]]</text>
    <sha1>c222ad63e9e6a1e286ff83e0861447ce17bf759f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20160916235007|998">
  <title>Space Based Solar Power</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>2</id>
  <revision>
    <id>998</id>
    <parentid>997</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-16T23:50:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Skylon */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11918" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is right on.

====Skylon====

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO must include 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh per kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>d2ff1e7e79d4dc7a04221406fee2b400eb550827</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>999</id>
    <parentid>998</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-17T00:16:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11920" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO must include 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh per kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with a fairly close gamma ray burst.
Those are typically a few seconds, but it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Alternately, the earth could have been hit with an unprecedented solar flare.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>4c0d6463b762c4bc99647100ec4a8a530f94a47f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1000</id>
    <parentid>999</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-17T00:22:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Reliability */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11938" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

The fuel fraction to raise cargo from LEO to GEO is about 20%  So 15 tons of cargo delivered to LEO must include 3 tons of hydrogen to deliver to GEO (with or without a stop at 12,000 km for construction).  

Thus for 12 tons in GEO, the trip to LEO burn 59 tons in the Skylon and 3 tons for the LEO to GEO leg.  I.e., ~62 tons for 12 tons delivered or ~5.17 tons of hydrogen per ton of cargo or 5.2 kg of LH2 for one kg of parts.  It takes 6.5 to 7 kg of parts per kW installed.  For a kW of capacity, it takes about 35 kg of LH2.  The hydrogen has an energy content of ~50 kWh/kg plus it takes about 20 kWh/kg to liquify it.  [[http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/liquid-hydrogen-delivery]]  The energy expenses to lift a kW of capacity to GEO is therefore ~2400 kWh per kW installed. This would take 100 days to repay the energy after startup or a little over 3 months.  For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>b569bc7260e1a452eb44a1c7925882b5da1c1ceb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1001</id>
    <parentid>1000</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-22T02:59:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Skylon */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14063" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level cost alocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW 6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>230f9db84f408017f8f21083fe3ba1d09bebb26f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1002</id>
    <parentid>1001</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-22T03:02:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Top level cost alocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14078" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>bdf5193a9e903940c653379b4be04e5b003ffd48</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1003</id>
    <parentid>1002</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-23T05:22:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="14108" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

For a repayment of about 3.6 times a year and a lifetime of 30 years, the EROEI is a little over 100 to one.  This is as good as the best conventional oil.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>d41190d967cddbb5ef6c25541a683ebb9e975878</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1004</id>
    <parentid>1003</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-09-25T02:42:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16647" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>06ab037f41f80e3de11d7bba1bde4bef497db565</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1005</id>
    <parentid>1004</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T05:50:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* LEO to GEO */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16798" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX will not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

== Platform (JIG) ==

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>61c9aafa1fa3d2cdb7a5f71d10c30a2e4e1434bb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1006</id>
    <parentid>1005</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T05:54:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* SpaceX */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="17005" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

== Platform (JIG) ==

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>e23f410b59946af07db9d4ad734ec343a59ed674</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1007</id>
    <parentid>1006</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T05:59:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="17317" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

== Platform (JIG) ==

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

There is a requirement for construction workers.  On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 people.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be fairly thick to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth. at some high orbit above the space junk.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==


[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>431d0b5f02719dbb604fd7754211a7bcf8fe38bd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1008</id>
    <parentid>1007</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T06:24:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* CONSTRUCTION SITE */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18934" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy polity changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively ease to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>287871e523246d2ce33876c4afb8769c8a3ebb05</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1009</id>
    <parentid>1008</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T06:28:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18934" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively ease to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>c8bfbc0a4b9d5b4b46ce7e02eaf8e6cf855c3966</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1010</id>
    <parentid>1009</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-16T06:34:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18934" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Rectenna ==

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>36e71c168c3050485dd71a35d6aed02109bd81b4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1011</id>
    <parentid>1010</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-17T18:57:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Rectenna */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="19123" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>ef5ef11a341bcfc8691b7008ad450350ca639f07</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1012</id>
    <parentid>1011</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-17T19:02:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Tug Rectenna */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="19500" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>d9939dc4e42e90d05b7f3456d92b6fc4f6aee035</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1013</id>
    <parentid>1012</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-21T03:28:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="22896" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost. 

I have been thinking about the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport.  It's possible we may build power satellites entirely using
robots.  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 500 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 500
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 12,000 km (the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>ce553925ecaacc2b847c22fbb3534a308cbee027</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1014</id>
    <parentid>1013</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-10-21T04:10:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Self Power (Out to GEO) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25205" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 500 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be a ton per square meter or more to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.  It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 12,000 km is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost. 

I have been thinking about the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport.  It's possible we may build power satellites entirely using
robots.  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 500 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 500
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 12,000 km (the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>6d880ea6b095d85fc003e87858ffae7e1375e435</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1015</id>
    <parentid>1014</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-14T05:30:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25327" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, we figure 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost. 

I have been thinking about the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport.  It's possible we may build power satellites entirely using
robots.  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>2003e0acc5e548d8218f41e3d013ba0f09b6dff6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1016</id>
    <parentid>1015</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-14T23:06:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25499" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot industry.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost. 

About the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs (teleopation is yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>a05cf0f542e424e4493983f879e37adfee6b0457</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1017</id>
    <parentid>1016</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-14T23:26:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25911" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>21eb3daf93e38b1acec5fcabca37d40d7598f5fd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1018</id>
    <parentid>1017</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T00:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Payback time and ERoEI */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="28372" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) ==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>04199afbeec4a0f164640c73baea241e61cfb27a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1019</id>
    <parentid>1018</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T00:21:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Photovoltaic (PV) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="28577" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is an important number as is the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>a970d778a95f011887bff2c2d54605e845aa37f6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1020</id>
    <parentid>1019</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T00:23:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Mass */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="28576" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 12,000 km, one third of the way to GEO as the orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also imagine a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a large concentrating reflector to bring light inside.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and
transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  I don't think for social and economy of scale reasons that
fewer than about 400 would make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the place
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ee5dd4337a0eec48c128b5549f0abd80b23937b3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1021</id>
    <parentid>1020</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T00:32:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* CONSTRUCTION SITE */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="28743" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>9f56619431239190a7f29f9217c887aea8c40b4d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1022</id>
    <parentid>1021</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T00:44:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="28918" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]


= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>89aa924303c3be964877466398c08e78d43f5095</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1023</id>
    <parentid>1022</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T01:07:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport Earth to LEO */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29531" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>e9d4897bb8a177c6d3493054beb7cb2167f20518</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1024</id>
    <parentid>1023</parentid>
    <timestamp>2016-12-17T01:07:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Skylon */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29482" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>0117a312f42d9baf80fb65e874bdb819c174d2e9</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1025</id>
    <parentid>1024</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-01-29T01:34:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Skylon Doesn't Cause Ozone damage (NOx) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29487" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.

Space based solar power is renewable.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by the process is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other
proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite
not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Top level place holder cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>4df9021fd7280f7b9ba9509897a621317cf83bfb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1026</id>
    <parentid>1025</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-02-13T06:44:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29801" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources to provide reliable power.  The cost of the backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement, the energy content of LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has this split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>96d9101414007253270b754fefede3770358984a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1027</id>
    <parentid>1026</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-03-09T23:25:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Cost allocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29811" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources to provide reliable power.  The cost of the backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement, the energy content of LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>d4e2445b60842c107bf9ecd496c0f264cf433329</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1028</id>
    <parentid>1027</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-03-09T23:27:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29822" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources to provide reliable power.  The cost of the backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement, the energy content of LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==
==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>c16526a16088a03b3ccf6ca847a066aa07a4528b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1029</id>
    <parentid>1028</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-03-09T23:29:24Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Light pressure */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29857" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources to provide reliable power.  The cost of the backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement, the energy content of LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ecfe921bbf95224a7c3bf1798cfc72edb2ab58ec</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1030</id>
    <parentid>1029</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-03-09T23:31:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Falcon heavy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29857" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Energy, particularly electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the state utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources to provide reliable power.  The cost of the backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  We might
do a little better because we can use warming the LNG before steam reforming to cool the
hydrogen.  Ignoring that possible improvement, the energy content of LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>1f871bc56f894974760090df9fc8fd6d3c53860e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1031</id>
    <parentid>1030</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-13T16:10:00Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30449" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we may build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 400 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
half of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 400
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>adec30fe61b99847c385681b459ba3a8cec4271e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1032</id>
    <parentid>1031</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-13T23:12:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Habitat--Company Town? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30484" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy, power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>430a8132769b0a36d6b34eb6ad64509cdf524926</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1033</id>
    <parentid>1032</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-13T23:38:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30485" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, energy is just there.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ca30d280882b71c211b186a1378a8408a92b56d0</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1034</id>
    <parentid>1033</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-14T19:07:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30521" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>f58cffeb4928b590501b3f743a1f6e8ac854c765</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1035</id>
    <parentid>1034</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-25T14:20:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30706" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellite? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly cover in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA 

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>78488dbb613ac6b250ab6e2698be43d11d10442a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1036</id>
    <parentid>1035</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-27T01:49:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellite? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31055" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly cover in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>3280df77417014abfbdb6c48be239819836e255f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1037</id>
    <parentid>1036</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-27T16:26:03Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31089" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>56ce06814c240e883a0f178d37a889030a05b6b7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1038</id>
    <parentid>1037</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-30T01:18:52Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31118" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

(get graph from our finite world)[[File:Example.jpg]]

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>3bf3b4ee51d21eded3b04ede0c53b17a2e6af65e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1039</id>
    <parentid>1038</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-05-30T20:27:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31084" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquify.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy investment LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI===

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>6c97a87c4d3332457fba1684069d57737919937e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1040</id>
    <parentid>1039</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T00:05:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31491" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that included a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an 
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ede11397d7a986cc0b4a66db97255c9929d966d2</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1041</id>
    <parentid>1040</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T04:16:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Thermal */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31506" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that included a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

The below spreadsheet assumes $1,600,000 per MW as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites run supplying base load, here assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the model is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It's a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an 
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>560fe0661e4894ee1c8b65625d5a661ab1f5506d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1042</id>
    <parentid>1041</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T04:37:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31529" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that included a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load, in the spreadsheet assumed ~91% of the time, it may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is close enough to 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an 
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>36348db3281c4bc1c5fd87fca44308ef68f815c7</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1043</id>
    <parentid>1042</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T04:41:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31542" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that included a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass number of 6.5 kg/kW, an 
installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>40a8244f0d922e5edd2869e3f6ecb2ca88518728</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1044</id>
    <parentid>1043</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T04:48:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31594" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy, is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation, the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that included a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GIECO, Charles Schawb.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet, try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>1abff526164e10942fefa2598bc1b4c9c2bb5549</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1045</id>
    <parentid>1044</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-01T16:23:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31638" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad
and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>888911d410c81292de5898727644547aeb90837f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1046</id>
    <parentid>1045</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T00:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31682" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to investigate in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>c3eaf8cef9b7976ae9c79f48fec830df2bc46b32</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20160916235007|998">
  <title>File:Mearns.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>180</id>
  <revision>
    <id>636</id>
    <timestamp>2017-05-30T20:24:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Graphic that comes from a source that says it is ok to use provided it is acknowledged</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="86" xml:space="preserve">Graphic that comes from a source that says it is ok to use provided it is acknowledged</text>
    <sha1>b26be7d807be74118513bd3e7a3490bfdb10ee9b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Space Based Solar Power</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>2</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1047</id>
    <parentid>1046</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T00:20:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31692" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>5521830891961b2c26c340f87d7bdb70cdcd2dc4</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1048</id>
    <parentid>1047</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T04:25:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Parts energy, repayment time, ERoEI */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31740" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 permitted cost split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>8471a46e7f789465a5ef3eb1268d990384659923</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1049</id>
    <parentid>1048</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T04:29:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Cost allocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31765" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Forward and Holt on draining van Allen belt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt, however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>5be5e8216ff4893016f3a887d1b22304e08725db</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1050</id>
    <parentid>1049</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T04:36:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31849" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

==Mass==
The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>eaddc6e2a92222390ab47f746bfe439dd175460b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1051</id>
    <parentid>1050</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-02T04:40:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Common considerations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31849" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>e38f62594154af62f8c35b018d2c4d89d92304f3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1052</id>
    <parentid>1051</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-03T05:22:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="30825" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>8c7c6274d523952e8db3598a2aa2a2799d8954af</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1053</id>
    <parentid>1052</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-03T05:24:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Energy payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31849" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 origin is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  (They are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.)

Power satellites potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>7f951fc29b3eeffb67fd5a625dd4058f9c3a5e14</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1054</id>
    <parentid>1053</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-04T20:06:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32037" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>bb4e7c174abdc4496b44eebe9d0177540a85b784</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1055</id>
    <parentid>1054</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-04T20:09:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32045" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost of electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>7b30fbef178211aa5e3e667e86e777600ac0fa21</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1056</id>
    <parentid>1055</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-04T20:11:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32054" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>05dc40f5e33e7f0a20b0383703ace279043c7a71</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1057</id>
    <parentid>1056</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-04T20:57:43Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32120" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>4251a0ec3d8042f6d95c4c19afe0c54425925208</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1058</id>
    <parentid>1057</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-04T22:24:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32131" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the target cost.

== Payback time and ERoEI ==

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets.  Future work will firm them up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be questioned.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Energy payback time==

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the fuel.

===Parts energy, repayment time and ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested)=== 

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is EROEI or energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>cdeb50cee6525793b8f0b6419381406102c41e9c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1059</id>
    <parentid>1058</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T02:46:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32173" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar averaged about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.


= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>51c634014bc9ff209dd27d626cc32d15e442c7af</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1060</id>
    <parentid>1059</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T14:47:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32191" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.


= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>47dcace68f73278e501b05fa4215bad2154aa737</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1061</id>
    <parentid>1060</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T15:10:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32573" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable power.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.


= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>544e8346cb63addfc921e628f647a4190e21b615</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1062</id>
    <parentid>1061</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T15:13:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Power Satellites and Energy Economics */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32572" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>da3372c0768090526d89b731ab7d9ca6de5a4c97</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1063</id>
    <parentid>1062</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T15:15:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Levelized cost of power */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32599" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as 

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>c5e794825425140c3183a82d0441043e4aace382</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1064</id>
    <parentid>1063</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-05T20:31:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Cost allocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32607" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.


Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  If you
Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>b86bfa0b02a85b0db5bc454f38572d543b16928b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1065</id>
    <parentid>1064</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-06T19:05:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32668" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other renewable
proposal that is even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>4dbd3a9baa53c81024f8262156accfab0441cf92</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1066</id>
    <parentid>1065</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-07T21:49:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32683" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>1130632a096736b84ca6ee4806f05e087dd34b75</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1067</id>
    <parentid>1066</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-07T21:57:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32875" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  A Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles
in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>362958ecea8af118a483b8753cffbc6361f98771</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1068</id>
    <parentid>1067</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-07T23:18:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Transport energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32820" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of Current Study ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis metholodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>fe24ef1c40c3feb0c48a4ff751939736b6b43a27</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1069</id>
    <parentid>1068</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-07T23:23:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Methodology of Current Study */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32814" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>6f062ec31a51cd87213b9a2c3dc202b46da7edbd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1070</id>
    <parentid>1069</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-07T23:54:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Cost allocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32873" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>9a6f0797b85f735f29651884080a8cc5fc449f73</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1071</id>
    <parentid>1070</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-08T23:14:55Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Cost allocations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32910" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.  The energy from a power satellite is available 99% of the time.  (There is up to a 70 minute eclipse around the equinox.)

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in more detail.

 
In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a number of 8 weeks.  I have
determined similar numbers, but they depend on highly efficient
transport.  John uses an energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and
doubles it twice for his estimate.    Is that reasonable?

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>e5a555559c326c3fb5a10dcfb8a9838f9377a674</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1072</id>
    <parentid>1071</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-08T23:19:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Parts energy */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32741" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into the power satellites.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>b9d73ab9cdd98d9931a88357b669db44fc880299</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1073</id>
    <parentid>1072</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-08T23:21:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32738" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.


====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>5ad10c616d20a3e7961af5edbbcd668b68b6539f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1074</id>
    <parentid>1073</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-09T00:11:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Common considerations */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32812" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

== Transport Methods Surface to LEO ==

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

== Transport Methods LEO to GEO ==

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>e4dffd9c7033ac09a88ee65ce127c8f986e355c8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1075</id>
    <parentid>1074</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-18T18:32:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Methodology of This Work */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32823" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface gird to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis proceedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

== Transport Methods Surface to LEO ==

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

== Transport Methods LEO to GEO ==

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>d771ced4729faa087f73d6947ebc8a86bc686c7d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1076</id>
    <parentid>1075</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-06-22T01:24:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Hkhenson</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* What are Power Satellites? */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="33051" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface grid to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

If power satellites reach a high market penetration at times the power demand will go below their output.  Power in excess of current demand can be fed to synthetic fuel plants solving the liquid transport fuel problem as well.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis procedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

== Transport Methods Surface to LEO ==

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

== Transport Methods LEO to GEO ==

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ebe93e6f5f26b3197dfa09557b981ab39913e96f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>2</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-20T05:57:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power  = What are Power Satellites? =  The history is covered in the Wikipedia articl..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="33051" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface grid to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

If power satellites reach a high market penetration at times the power demand will go below their output.  Power in excess of current demand can be fed to synthetic fuel plants solving the liquid transport fuel problem as well.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis procedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

== Transport Methods Surface to LEO ==

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

== Transport Methods LEO to GEO ==

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ebe93e6f5f26b3197dfa09557b981ab39913e96f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Template:Brainstorm</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>199</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1126</id>
    <timestamp>2017-08-05T14:39:56Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tag template for Brainstorm-grade pages</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="873" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV&gt;
{| style="border 1px solid #070707; font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; {{RBX}}"
| [[File:Brainstorm Article Graphic.svg|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Brainstorms|'''Brainstorm''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
It's not quite a stub -- it has less pretense of organization than that right now.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy until someone is ready to turn this into a formal article.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;When this enter the realm of being a formal article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|- 
| colspan="2" | 
'''You can help this wiki by adding your ideas on this subject to this page.''' &lt;BR/&gt;
'''Any idea about this -- even an incomplete and messily presented one -- helps this page as a starting point.'''&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Thank you.'''
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Brainstorms]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6db516913f06a665a43119d167af1c979f75c68b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1127</id>
    <parentid>1126</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-08-05T15:14:08Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Miros1</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Fixed verb</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="874" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV&gt;
{| style="border 1px solid #070707; font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; {{RBX}}"
| [[File:Brainstorm Article Graphic.svg|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Brainstorms|'''Brainstorm''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
It's not quite a stub -- it has less pretense of organization than that right now.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy until someone is ready to turn this into a formal article.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;When this enters the realm of being a formal article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|- 
| colspan="2" | 
'''You can help this wiki by adding your ideas on this subject to this page.''' &lt;BR/&gt;
'''Any idea about this -- even an incomplete and messily presented one -- helps this page as a starting point.'''&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Thank you.'''
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Brainstorms]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2e1ae0f2dd15874b191f4ab044d23059c41b139f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Template:Black</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>198</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1122</id>
    <timestamp>2017-08-11T14:01:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>LPedia.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>As Black is a specified color, it probably needs a template too.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="284" xml:space="preserve">&lt;includeonly&gt;&lt;onlyinclude&gt;#000000&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;/includeonly&gt;

{| {{Nicetable}}
| &lt;DIV style="background:{{ {{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }}; height:3em; width:3em"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
| &lt;DIV style="height:3m; width:5em; text-align:center"&gt;'''{{ROOTPAGENAME}}'''&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

[[Category:Color Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>c5afc802f3c4b8908551eb2d6473cfa74ea8d7bf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1410</id>
    <parentid>1409</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-10-21T06:28:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exodictionary.org&gt;Mdelaney</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7631" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''NEW ACCOUNT CREATION IS TEMPORARILY DISABLED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;We hope to get things back in order sometime soon.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Anonymous contributions and existing account logins remain permitted.'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>a52f66bd6eb49f8997b2b5b2f4f48a56a89f0d59</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Template:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>209</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1185</id>
    <parentid>1184</parentid>
    <timestamp>2017-11-09T23:55:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>categorization</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1949" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0px;margin:0px;font-family:'Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten;filter:progid:dximagetransform.microsoft.emboss"&gt;&lt;!-- emboss is MSIE only, unfortunately, which also means I can't test it from here --&gt;
{| STYLE = "margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px;background:#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "height:8px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; .
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; / &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ~
| 
| 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S&amp;nbsp;A&amp;nbsp;N&amp;nbsp;D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;E&amp;nbsp;G&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;L&amp;nbsp;I&amp;nbsp;T&amp;nbsp;H &amp;nbsp; B&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.       
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;,
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(    
|  
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
| &amp;nbsp;_
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fef6520658cef0d8e3bad828590174cb52e7e1b6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Home</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>1</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-20T03:37:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MediaWiki default</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="735" xml:space="preserve">&lt;strong&gt;MediaWiki has been installed.&lt;/strong&gt;

Consult the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.

== Getting started ==
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Learn how to combat spam on your wiki]</text>
    <sha1>5702e4d5fd9173246331a889294caf01a3ad3706</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>4</id>
    <parentid>1</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-20T06:10:10Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="719" xml:space="preserve">'''[Welcome to Spacepedia]'''

== Getting started ==
* Consult the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Learn how to combat spam on your wiki]</text>
    <sha1>2abdbf09376427223c43f0d7afc7a7a8c660119b</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>5</id>
    <parentid>4</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-20T06:10:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="721" xml:space="preserve">'''[[Welcome to Spacepedia]]'''

== Getting started ==
* Consult the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Learn how to combat spam on your wiki]</text>
    <sha1>abe005ca29e966580334d5e2a4a3b2aad2af6705</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>6</id>
    <parentid>5</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:49:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Jburk moved page [[Main Page]] to [[Home]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="721" xml:space="preserve">'''[[Welcome to Spacepedia]]'''

== Getting started ==
* Consult the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software.
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ]
* [https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki for your language]
* [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Learn how to combat spam on your wiki]</text>
    <sha1>abe005ca29e966580334d5e2a4a3b2aad2af6705</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1374</id>
    <parentid>6</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:49:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Jburk</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Jburk moved page [[Main Page]] to [[Home]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Welcome to Spacepedia</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>3</id>
  <revision>
    <id>3</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-20T06:08:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "==Mission of Spacepedia==  The Mission of Spacepedia is to promote space exploration in all methods and facets.  ==The Vision==  A space general topical online encyclopedia ma..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="710" xml:space="preserve">==Mission of Spacepedia==

The Mission of Spacepedia is to promote space exploration in all methods and facets.

==The Vision==

A space general topical online encyclopedia maintained by a large group of volunteers, commonly called a "wiki" -- the Hawaiian term for "quick" -- and the "-pedia" suffix denotes its scholarly and comprehensive nature.

== The Team ==

[http://moonsociety.org The Moon Society] maintains this wiki and ensures its editorial relevance.  We founded a group of wikis in 2006 including [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia].

== How you can Help ==

Join [http://moon-society.slack.com our Slack channel] and help us make Spacepedia a great resource!</text>
    <sha1>46df5757f591f1346d96f268ed002ac429587332</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>Main Page</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>4</id>
  <revision>
    <id>7</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:49:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Jburk moved page [[Main Page]] to [[Home]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20170602002017|1047">
  <title>MediaWiki:Sidebar</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>5</id>
  <revision>
    <id>8</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:51:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with " * navigation ** home|home-description ** recentchanges-url|recentchanges ** randompage-url|randompage ** helppage|help * SEARCH * TOOLBOX * LANGUAGES"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="150" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|home-description
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>7eb6588b01669882ccceb8d770937b7efe3742ac</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>9</id>
    <parentid>8</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:51:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="138" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>461f06de18a486c695a6b57c8e30794eba164227</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>10</id>
    <parentid>9</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:54:05Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="228" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* Interwiki
**marsp:Home|Marspedia
**lunarp:Home|Lunarpedia
**exd:Main_Page|ExoDictionary
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>18484b14faa7aa728c35756c77c91002237cc3be</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>11</id>
    <parentid>10</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:57:02Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="259" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* Interwiki
**http://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**http://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>f5fd1d9c9c25be820e5dec34255fcf07c258b2d3</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>12</id>
    <parentid>11</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:57:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="269" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* interwiki|Interwiki
**http://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**http://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>49dc3c078535ac6659e2629991b77ce4c70c1ccf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>13</id>
    <parentid>12</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:57:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="266" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help
* Interwiki-header
**http://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**http://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary
* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>39c6bb69ed287929799ba7f892e3a2d23293cb91</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>14</id>
    <parentid>13</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T20:58:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="263" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help

* Interwiki
**https://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**https://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary

* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>e4d4183abf8dc23e8f000be5deab0aaea9fe0149</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>MediaWiki:Sidebar</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>5</id>
  <revision>
    <id>15</id>
    <parentid>14</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-25T21:00:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="263" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help

* Our Wikis
**https://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**https://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary

* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>83bd44d2fab8d9cd3829ead5e001b6ceeb4ff22d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>36</id>
    <parentid>15</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:51:57Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="297" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** neededarticles|Needed Articles
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help

* Our Wikis
**https://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**https://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary

* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>a808e609afaff37bf7ba954ef2ef75601f01264a</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>37</id>
    <parentid>36</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:52:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="298" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** Needed Articles|Needed Articles
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help

* Our Wikis
**https://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**https://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary

* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>9db71ef95d5263cb343f0a564a055406046a10bd</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>40</id>
    <parentid>37</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="298" xml:space="preserve">
* navigation
** home|Home
** Needed Articles|Needed Articles
** recentchanges-url|recentchanges
** randompage-url|randompage
** helppage|help

* Our Wikis
**https://marspedia.org|Marspedia
**https://lunarpedia.org|Lunarpedia
**http://exodictionary.org|ExoDictionary

* SEARCH
* TOOLBOX
* LANGUAGES</text>
    <sha1>9db71ef95d5263cb343f0a564a055406046a10bd</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>MediaWiki:Mainpage</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>6</id>
  <revision>
    <id>16</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-26T21:26:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "Home"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="4" xml:space="preserve">Home</text>
    <sha1>70f8bb9a8a5393ef080507a89e4b98d139000d65</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>17</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T04:05:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "Founded in 1985 by Jim Bennett, the American Rocket Company, or AMROC, was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.  It had over 200 hybrid rocket motor test firings ran..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="544" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by Jim Bennett, the American Rocket Company, or AMROC, was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 hybrid rocket motor test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at NASA's Stennis Space Center's E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the Industrial Launch Vehicle (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the SET-1 sounding rocket was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995. Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by SpaceDev, and its lineage is part of SpaceShipOne.</text>
    <sha1>f7b8c2421df2da3099e41fe04912b675f508db69</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>International Space Development Conference</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>8</id>
  <revision>
    <id>18</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T04:13:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "The Annual gathering of the National Space Society, usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend. Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have b..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="220" xml:space="preserve">The Annual gathering of the National Space Society, usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend. Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have been in Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia.</text>
    <sha1>cb201e89cd0e7a18d84f3bdfb04cd82517769e06</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>19</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T04:14:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "#REDIRECT {{International Space Development Conference}}"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="56" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT {{International Space Development Conference}}</text>
    <sha1>c4879bf87918b21a78ab92679d8ccaf695df5239</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>20</id>
    <parentid>19</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T04:19:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Redirected page to [[International Space Development Conference]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="56" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[International Space Development Conference]]</text>
    <sha1>2aade149fbfae2096d46f1ecfc24db4effc28b4c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>21</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T04:52:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "Founded in 1933, the British Interplanetary Society (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight. Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="875" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1933, the British Interplanetary Society (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight. Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership. It publishes a technical journal, Journal of British Interplanetary Society, a monthly general interest magazine, Spaceflight, a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, Space Chronicle, and a magazine for children, Voyage. Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930. It still exists in the form of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences. 

==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS</text>
    <sha1>1f6d0f531bb466e4d5707a75d694478496bbe509</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>11</id>
  <revision>
    <id>22</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:02:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "JAXA is the primary aerospace agency in Japan.  They operate the H-IIA and H-IIB launch vehicles."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="97" xml:space="preserve">JAXA is the primary aerospace agency in Japan.

They operate the H-IIA and H-IIB launch vehicles.</text>
    <sha1>337175b303e225f4ffc9161b86dd2bded98e048d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>NASA Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>12</id>
  <revision>
    <id>23</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:03:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers"..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1149" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]</text>
    <sha1>e6c29ae058049e57a104a7c96e1567ab68df5354</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>24</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:34:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "==Cancelled after achieving orbit== '''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''  ===European Union=== *{{spa..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2384" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 


==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>6459e7bd82c227f5139acadd81648cfeafe3f101</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>25</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:38:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt; ---- usage:  {&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}  for example:  {&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Disconti..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c704173fcfb0fa9c3748fe379028dc97f0ce9392</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>26</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:42:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "==Licensed==  *[[Alacantra]]  *[[Baikonur]]  * [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)  *[[California Spaceport]]  *[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)  *[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]  *Churc..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1198" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] deep ocean floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a5cae85afd7246526ae4d88b9ec02c07b976bfa8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Needed Articles</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>16</id>
  <revision>
    <id>27</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:43:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of n..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="631" xml:space="preserve">The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of needed articles. Please to not hesitate to add list ideas to this list or article ideas to the appropriate lists linked to from here.

...or start the article or work on improving an existing article... 

*[[List of Scientific Missions]]
*[[List of Galaxies]]
*[[List of Planets]]
*[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]
*[[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]
*[[List of Comets]]
*[[List of Nebulae]]
*[[List of Constellations]]
*[[List of Stars]]</text>
    <sha1>fc9519aea812f07e5aa0caf17cde2cc453b7c40d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>29</id>
    <parentid>27</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:47:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="658" xml:space="preserve">The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of needed articles. Please to not hesitate to add list ideas to this list or article ideas to the appropriate lists linked to from here.

...or start the article or work on improving an existing article... 

*[[List of Scientific Missions]]
*[[List of Galaxies]]
*[[List of Planets]]
*[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]
*[[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]
*[[List of Comets]]
*[[List of Space Museums]]
*[[List of Nebulae]]
*[[List of Constellations]]
*[[List of Stars]]</text>
    <sha1>f5ad1951ed3f956f42491a2b321fc06a4cbb2a8d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>31</id>
    <parentid>29</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:48:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="688" xml:space="preserve">The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of needed articles. Please to not hesitate to add list ideas to this list or article ideas to the appropriate lists linked to from here.

...or start the article or work on improving an existing article... 

*[[List of Scientific Missions]]
*[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]
*[[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]
*[[List of Space Facilities]]
*[[List of Space Museums]]
*[[List of Planets]]
*[[List of Galaxies]]
*[[List of Comets]]
*[[List of Nebulae]]
*[[List of Constellations]]
*[[List of Stars]]</text>
    <sha1>fa22582c0bc166b32088dc9a124557c5999ddd16</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>28</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:45:53Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=  [[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;  =EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=  ==China== {| width=75% | width=34% | '''Booster''' | width..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16061" xml:space="preserve">=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ab40900ccf1e0af7a8df07c767aa83c38eadc97b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>List of Space Museums</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>18</id>
  <revision>
    <id>30</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:47:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "{{Bootstrap}}  [[The Aero Space Museum Association of Calgary]]&lt;BR/&gt; &lt;!-- [[The Air Force Museum (Russia)]] offtopic?--&gt; [[Budapest Technical Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt; [[Camp Artek]]&lt;BR/&gt;..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1717" xml:space="preserve">{{Bootstrap}}

[[The Aero Space Museum Association of Calgary]]&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;!-- [[The Air Force Museum (Russia)]] offtopic?--&gt;
[[Budapest Technical Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Camp Artek]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Energia Museum of Rocket Space Engineering]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Goddard Space Flight Center (Museum)]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hill Aerospace Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Intrepid Sea Air Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Johnson Space Center (Museum)]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[KCSC|Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Kbely Air Force Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Lewis Research Center (Museum)]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Memorial Museum of Cosmonautics]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Michigan Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Militärhistorisches Museum]] (Dresden)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Military History Museum]] (Warsaw)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Museum of Flight]] (Seattle)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Musee de l'Air]] (Le Bourget)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASM|National Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Nehru Planetarium]] (New Delhi)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Neil Armstrong Air &amp; Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NPO Mashinostroeniya (Museum)|NPO Mashinostroeniya (Federal Scientific and Production Center)]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Octave Chanute Aerospace Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Oklahoma Air Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Oregon Air &amp; Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Peterson Air &amp; Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Pima Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[San Diego Aerospace Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[South Dakota Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Spaceport USA]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Star City (museum)]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Stennis Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[TASM|Tulsa Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Tsiolokovskiy Museum]] (Kaluga)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[U.S. Space and Rocket Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Virginia Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Western Aerospace Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[The Western Museum of Flight]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Wings Over the Rockies Air and Space Museum]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Zhukovskiy Air Museum]] (Monino)&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Hong Kong Space Museum]][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Space_Museum]&lt;BR/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>abda733e947787447238c8f6b59d9e141331949c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>List of Space Facilities</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>19</id>
  <revision>
    <id>32</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:48:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "==NASA Flight Centers==  [[Kennedy Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt; *[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/home/index.html NASA Kennedy Space Center] in Florida [[Johnson Space Center]]&lt;BR/..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1775" xml:space="preserve">==NASA Flight Centers==

[[Kennedy Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/home/index.html NASA Kennedy Space Center] in Florida
[[Johnson Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/ NASA Johnson Space Center] in Houston, Texas
[[Marshall Space Flight Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.msfc.nasa.gov/ NASA Marshall Space Flight Center] in Huntsville, Alabama
[[Goddard Space Flight Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/home/index.html NASA Goddard Space Flight Center] in Greenbelt, Maryland

[[Wallops Flight Facility]] operated by Goddard Space Flight Center&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Stennis Space Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/stennis/home/index.html NASA Stennis Space Center] in MIssissippi

==NASA Research Centers==

[[Dryden Flight Research Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/home/index.html NASA Dryden Flight Research Center] in California
*[http://www.arc.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center] in California
[[Glenn Research Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[[John Glenn Research Center]] in Cleveland, Ohio 
[[Langley Research Center]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/home/index.html NASA Langley Research Center] in Hampton, Virginia
and one affiliated laboratory,
[[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]]&lt;BR/&gt;
*[http://www.jpl.nasa.gov NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory] in Pasadena, California

==Non-US==

[[Baikonur Cosmodrome]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Golytsino-2]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[RSC Energia]] &lt;BR/&gt;
[[NPO Mashinostroeniya]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Star City]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Zhukovskiy Aerodrome]] (Moscow)&lt;BR/&gt;

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Launch Sites]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

{{Infra Stub}}

[[Category:Organizations]]
[[Category:NASA]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>f57cbe9442314385ccc1dac719b6e33f8e86c412</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Scramjet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>20</id>
  <revision>
    <id>33</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:49:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet tech..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="561" xml:space="preserve">A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
 
{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>780090911d7bd6f77013c670a681183a525a2244</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>34</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:50:20Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been p..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1718" xml:space="preserve">A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]

[http://spacetethers.com http://spacetethers.com]


{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>6725b5b18a2282a0a3a1d12d958b35aae69d8b96</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>35</id>
    <timestamp>2018-06-27T05:50:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this reduces gradually over y..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3061" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>70380bf84781f6391053640e5c74435086dc5ba7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Black</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>198</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1123</id>
    <parentid>1122</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-08-01T14:34:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>LPedia.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="284" xml:space="preserve">&lt;includeonly&gt;&lt;onlyinclude&gt;#000000&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;/includeonly&gt;

{| {{Nicetable}}
| &lt;DIV style="background:{{ {{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }}; height:3em; width:3em"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
| &lt;DIV style="height:3m; width:5em; text-align:center"&gt;'''{{ROOTPAGENAME}}'''&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

[[Category:Color Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>c5afc802f3c4b8908551eb2d6473cfa74ea8d7bf</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1124</id>
    <parentid>1123</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:22:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="284" xml:space="preserve">&lt;includeonly&gt;&lt;onlyinclude&gt;#000000&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;/includeonly&gt;

{| {{Nicetable}}
| &lt;DIV style="background:{{ {{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }}; height:3em; width:3em"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
| &lt;DIV style="height:3m; width:5em; text-align:center"&gt;'''{{ROOTPAGENAME}}'''&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

[[Category:Color Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>c5afc802f3c4b8908551eb2d6473cfa74ea8d7bf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Colorblock</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>200</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1129</id>
    <timestamp>2018-08-01T14:52:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>nonapplicable&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Template to display a color square or rectangle; 1em square by default</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">&lt;onlyinclude&gt;&lt;DIV style="background:{{color|#FF7FBF}}; height:{{{height|1em}}}; width:{{{width|1em}}}; display:inline; display:inline-block"&gt; &lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

==Examples==
&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}


&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}

[[Category:Color Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ebed6c71faa70d4b57584847a4d880a998223473</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1130</id>
    <parentid>1129</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-08-01T14:55:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>nonapplicable&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Bugfix</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;onlyinclude&gt;&lt;DIV style="background:{{{color|#FF7FBF}}}; height:{{{height|1em}}}; width:{{{width|1em}}}; display:inline; display:inline-block"&gt; &lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

==Examples==
&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}


&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}

[[Category:Color Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f2882e28e4404c18ba1894a3094c18825defcc9d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1131</id>
    <parentid>1130</parentid>
    <timestamp>2018-08-11T13:29:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>nonapplicable&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Increasing default size</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;onlyinclude&gt;&lt;DIV style="background:{{{color|#FF7FBF}}}; height:{{{height|2em}}}; width:{{{width|2em}}}; display:inline; display:inline-block"&gt; &lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

==Examples==
&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}


&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}

[[Category:Color Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42f86da3253559bd1ccea4c17436d3ed75569dcb</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1132</id>
    <parentid>1131</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;onlyinclude&gt;&lt;DIV style="background:{{{color|#FF7FBF}}}; height:{{{height|2em}}}; width:{{{width|2em}}}; display:inline; display:inline-block"&gt; &lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

==Examples==
&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}


&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}

[[Category:Color Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42f86da3253559bd1ccea4c17436d3ed75569dcb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Spacepedia:Terms of Service</title>
  <ns>4</ns>
  <id>23</id>
  <revision>
    <id>38</id>
    <timestamp>2018-09-27T17:56:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "1. Terms  By accessing the website at http://spacepedia.org, you are agreeing to be bound by these terms of service, all applicable laws and regulations, and agree that you ar..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3321" xml:space="preserve">1. Terms

By accessing the website at http://spacepedia.org, you are agreeing to be bound by these terms of service, all applicable laws and regulations, and agree that you are responsible for compliance with any applicable local laws. If you do not agree with any of these terms, you are prohibited from using or accessing this site. The materials contained in this website are protected by applicable copyright and trademark law.

2. Use License

Permission is granted to use Spacepedia's content as per the license or attribution requirements specified by the article.  In the absence of a specific content license or attribution requirement, all material on Spacepedia is public domain.

Posting content on Spacepedia assumes you agree to these terms, and your contribution (unless tagged specifically with a content license or attribution requirements) will be considered public domain and/or CC0.

You must have the legal right to release your contribution under these terms.

3. Disclaimer

The materials on Spacepedia's website are provided on an 'as is' basis. Spacepedia makes no warranties, expressed or implied, and hereby disclaims and negates all other warranties including, without limitation, implied warranties or conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement of intellectual property or other violation of rights.

Further, Spacepedia does not warrant or make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials on its website or otherwise relating to such materials or on any sites linked to this site.

4. Limitations

In no event shall Spacepedia or its suppliers be liable for any damages (including, without limitation, damages for loss of data or profit, or due to business interruption) arising out of the use or inability to use the materials on Spacepedia's website, even if Spacepedia or a Spacepedia authorized representative has been notified orally or in writing of the possibility of such damage. Because some jurisdictions do not allow limitations on implied warranties, or limitations of liability for consequential or incidental damages, these limitations may not apply to you.

5. Accuracy of materials

The materials appearing on Spacepedia website could include technical, typographical, or photographic errors. Spacepedia does not warrant that any of the materials on its website are accurate, complete or current. Spacepedia may make changes to the materials contained on its website at any time without notice. However Spacepedia does not make any commitment to update the materials.

6. Links

Spacepedia has not reviewed all of the sites linked to its website and is not responsible for the contents of any such linked site. The inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by Spacepedia of the site. Use of any such linked website is at the user's own risk.

7. Modifications

Spacepedia may revise these terms of service for its website at any time without notice. By using this website you are agreeing to be bound by the then current version of these terms of service.

8. Governing Law

These terms and conditions are governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of Texas and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts in that State or location.</text>
    <sha1>9dfe9b6949e4c948d6d228d9944cac7320f08600</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1138</id>
    <parentid>250</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Fork2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>91</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1155</id>
    <parentid>253</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="342" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>709ea17830819087686e5d8078022613a6f7dda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Fork2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>92</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1157</id>
    <parentid>256</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="334" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f76363264f4ea12034093c8aa01445c7b48eaa1a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1159</id>
    <parentid>388</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:LunarpediaLogoH512 43.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;

----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>07e996db42854a0520f63900581394d4a2d68163</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1160</id>
    <parentid>1159</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T20:21:23Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to local version after accidental import from Exoplatz</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]

'''NOTE:''' This template has been modified to produce a local link, not an interwiki link, when a mirrored article invokes a Lunarpedia article using this template&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>75f2db0a7c0266fbd48bdb3d00432dcd96eade5a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:MMM</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>124</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1162</id>
    <parentid>392</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:28Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;includeonly&gt;[[Category:Moon Miners' Manifesto based articles]]&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2952cef88792eb54d67b8dde5c3b58c9c5039d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1167</id>
    <parentid>449</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:29Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on {{SITENAME}} is community provided.  Neither {{SITENAME}} nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fbf47935b25f7c3ab8baa3c0d5246c2d93d6ccab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1187</id>
    <parentid>527</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fce308332aac7aefe379e3799203b320cca73382</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1191</id>
    <parentid>540</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-01T18:37:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>lunarp&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exoproject Rocket Inverted 14px.png]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cd2379ab44ba71964f23894570ac10801f8858c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Attribution Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>24</id>
  <revision>
    <id>42</id>
    <parentid>41</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Bootstrap Lists</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>25</id>
  <revision>
    <id>45</id>
    <parentid>44</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="48" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}  

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>47d21730105964d6749a14219e8b4cffce7ca251</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Business Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>26</id>
  <revision>
    <id>47</id>
    <parentid>46</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Chemistry</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>27</id>
  <revision>
    <id>49</id>
    <parentid>48</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Conferences</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>28</id>
  <revision>
    <id>51</id>
    <parentid>50</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Earth Orbit</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>29</id>
  <revision>
    <id>53</id>
    <parentid>52</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="109" xml:space="preserve">Things and phenomena that exist or take place at least primarily in Earth Orbit.  Or will.

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>576a247f8666d11e84b37e773407c1a6ab268dda</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Essay Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>30</id>
  <revision>
    <id>55</id>
    <parentid>54</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Event Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>31</id>
  <revision>
    <id>57</id>
    <parentid>56</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:Exoplatz</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>32</id>
  <revision>
    <id>59</id>
    <parentid>58</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="104" xml:space="preserve">This is the category for direct pieces of wiki infrastructure, such as the main page.

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>124273e6e35799ba99a5393c219292ed0b52f2c5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20180625210022|15">
  <title>Category:HTML Userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>33</id>
  <revision>
    <id>62</id>
    <parentid>61</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="235" xml:space="preserve">These userboxes are written in pure HTML.  The  original purpose for such templates was to provide compatibility with legacy versions of MediaWiki, but additional, including non-Wiki applications may also exist.

[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>84138bf8f202f90128b6ba635a26eb54848b7ae0</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:History</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>34</id>
  <revision>
    <id>64</id>
    <parentid>63</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:History Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>35</id>
  <revision>
    <id>66</id>
    <parentid>65</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Images</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>36</id>
  <revision>
    <id>68</id>
    <parentid>67</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Infrastructural Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>37</id>
  <revision>
    <id>70</id>
    <parentid>69</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Institution Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>38</id>
  <revision>
    <id>72</id>
    <parentid>71</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Institutions</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>39</id>
  <revision>
    <id>74</id>
    <parentid>73</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Interwiki Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>40</id>
  <revision>
    <id>76</id>
    <parentid>75</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Launch System Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>41</id>
  <revision>
    <id>78</id>
    <parentid>77</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:License tags</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>42</id>
  <revision>
    <id>80</id>
    <parentid>79</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:License templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>43</id>
  <revision>
    <id>82</id>
    <parentid>81</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Lunarpedia userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>44</id>
  <revision>
    <id>88</id>
    <parentid>87</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--Categories--&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]</text>
    <sha1>48918277b875bbee57a5597015538dbb57d363d5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Main</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>45</id>
  <revision>
    <id>90</id>
    <parentid>89</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="106" xml:space="preserve">This is the base category.  Everything should be linked to from here.  Browse away!

[[Category:Exoplatz]]</text>
    <sha1>14a08fa983f675c73823ccd6190f172f09cc4cb1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Obsolete Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>46</id>
  <revision>
    <id>92</id>
    <parentid>91</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Organizational Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>47</id>
  <revision>
    <id>94</id>
    <parentid>93</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Organizations</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>48</id>
  <revision>
    <id>96</id>
    <parentid>95</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Pending Events</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>49</id>
  <revision>
    <id>98</id>
    <parentid>97</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:People</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>50</id>
  <revision>
    <id>100</id>
    <parentid>99</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Photos</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>51</id>
  <revision>
    <id>103</id>
    <parentid>102</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Physics Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>52</id>
  <revision>
    <id>105</id>
    <parentid>104</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Icons</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>53</id>
  <revision>
    <id>108</id>
    <parentid>107</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Images</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>54</id>
  <revision>
    <id>111</id>
    <parentid>110</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Public Domain Photos</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>55</id>
  <revision>
    <id>114</id>
    <parentid>113</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images]]</text>
    <sha1>1bbbfb84368f2da39ec40a9a00f960dd0a077fc5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Research Centers</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>56</id>
  <revision>
    <id>116</id>
    <parentid>115</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Rocketry</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>57</id>
  <revision>
    <id>118</id>
    <parentid>117</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Stub Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>58</id>
  <revision>
    <id>120</id>
    <parentid>119</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Subminimal Stubs</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>59</id>
  <revision>
    <id>122</id>
    <parentid>121</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Stub Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>52fd8dfc9b81d89f00bd8f72b9c466161c2b5448</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Tag Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>60</id>
  <revision>
    <id>124</id>
    <parentid>123</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Template icons</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>61</id>
  <revision>
    <id>127</id>
    <parentid>126</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="36" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Images][</text>
    <sha1>e4ef3da872e0af87205e861c7737c767bf32487f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>62</id>
  <revision>
    <id>129</id>
    <parentid>128</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>8a176325a812900010d88e49030983ff66b36cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Test Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>63</id>
  <revision>
    <id>131</id>
    <parentid>130</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Text Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>64</id>
  <revision>
    <id>133</id>
    <parentid>132</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Undescribed Categories</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>65</id>
  <revision>
    <id>136</id>
    <parentid>135</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="85" xml:space="preserve">These category pages lack a description.  Just saying.

[[Category:Wiki Maintenance]]</text>
    <sha1>1a8eb31329e91ef01876a43eb269a6e96f857c52</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:User Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>66</id>
  <revision>
    <id>138</id>
    <parentid>137</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:User templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>67</id>
  <revision>
    <id>140</id>
    <parentid>139</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Userboxes</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>68</id>
  <revision>
    <id>142</id>
    <parentid>141</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="44" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:User Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>625f70b045b59d1e71d15462a973b499f57bac44</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Violation Templates</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>69</id>
  <revision>
    <id>144</id>
    <parentid>143</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="39" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>3d17f1c36a5a0e82e6eae93112b2e25e7a022421</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Category:Wiki Maintenance</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>70</id>
  <revision>
    <id>146</id>
    <parentid>145</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="34" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>6604ba42a0ae3de5758ba9c9f0494651ae46f135</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Agri Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>71</id>
  <revision>
    <id>150</id>
    <parentid>149</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an Agricultural stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Agricultural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b9e4f1ca45650538fa419fecb160b164d7319509</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>72</id>
  <revision>
    <id>161</id>
    <parentid>160</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="656" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- &lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt; was used while a protection mechanism made this tag otherwise uneditable --&gt;
{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Autostubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>77dcc37dcc2eeaf234957beb6adb16f98be8ed5d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Biog Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>73</id>
  <revision>
    <id>165</id>
    <parentid>164</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a biographical stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Biographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1d266311d0debd6e182e1d7d15ac06294aa3745c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Bootstrap</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>74</id>
  <revision>
    <id>171</id>
    <parentid>170</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="562" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF"
| [[Image:Bootstrap1.png|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Lists|'''Bootstrap List''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
Its intent is to be a list of needed articles on a specific topic.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy.&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;If it should enter the realm of being a content article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Bootstrap Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5f33c12a0c54f8327e063cfc8bd6f21ab017a4fc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Business Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>75</id>
  <revision>
    <id>175</id>
    <parentid>174</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="441" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a business stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Business Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a1aed91795f8e44daa8671412d327930c75750c1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Chem Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>76</id>
  <revision>
    <id>179</id>
    <parentid>178</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="443" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a chemistry stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Chemistry Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>35598950decc6a1e842e153fae5536cb808b2a5e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Cleanup</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>77</id>
  <revision>
    <id>185</id>
    <parentid>184</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this article has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>10af88b42fa4c66806305839f02e0716b5009f41</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Cleanup Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>78</id>
  <revision>
    <id>188</id>
    <parentid>187</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | Work on this section has outpaced copyediting on it.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or tidying ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>634c5fbab801a2660df65136d7ed3a61dcdb4ca4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Comm Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>79</id>
  <revision>
    <id>192</id>
    <parentid>191</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a communications stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Communications Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>33d2ded9637446c895a32c3eb337ffc62183c2de</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Controversial</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>80</id>
  <revision>
    <id>197</id>
    <parentid>196</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="496" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a source of controversy. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by helping to resolve the issue in this article's &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversies]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d0e32f817e2ecce7e2f9b5268c3d79e647e96912</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Controversial Question Series</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>81</id>
  <revision>
    <id>202</id>
    <parentid>201</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="721" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Controversial Question 1.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt; This article is part of the '''Controversial Question Series'''.  Its purpose is not to come to final answers or even to reach a consensus. It is simply to explore the breadth of opinion in the space development community.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} participating]&lt;/span&gt; in the exploration (or roasting) of this question or proposal.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Controversial Questions]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ee292e1f04b9b04da2f750246a191c06658487b1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Debate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>82</id>
  <revision>
    <id>206</id>
    <parentid>205</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFEF3F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This article is a topic of debate. &lt;BR/&gt; Please feel free to  &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} jump in]&lt;/span&gt; with a constructive contribution.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Debates]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>04d956935778f91a2877011bebd18fa6817381e6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141730|64">
  <title>Template:Dev Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>83</id>
  <revision>
    <id>210</id>
    <parentid>209</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a development stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Development Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41930747c5a24b190348631823e2d4b5a09f535a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Empty List</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>84</id>
  <revision>
    <id>218</id>
    <parentid>217</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left;"&gt;
This List has no content.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;SPAN class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} starting]&lt;/SPAN&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unimplemented Lists]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a9f44959e1873468917a6c69f95be4fae2c3dcd3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Eng Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>85</id>
  <revision>
    <id>222</id>
    <parentid>221</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:33Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="448" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an engineering stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Engineering Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cab9d7392ae85236b34d8465da237b7e74774976</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Event Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>86</id>
  <revision>
    <id>226</id>
    <parentid>225</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="439" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an event stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Event Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2f301131d7e587e659622c9bab314b47681cb9aa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>87</id>
  <revision>
    <id>234</id>
    <parentid>233</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="316" xml:space="preserve">[[exd:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exodictionary.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{exd|Milligal|one-millionth gravity}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a7e91c38f389f02f09940b807862ddd6f2ee4be</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Expand</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>88</id>
  <revision>
    <id>241</id>
    <parentid>240</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is incomplete or needs more information.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>630d94b63394ef0849c3085ef2f63686fe85b7f1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Expandsec</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>89</id>
  <revision>
    <id>246</id>
    <parentid>245</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:9pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This section of the article is incomplete or needs more detail.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; or correcting it.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Expand Section]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b76dca4c829b3b4e5b735bce141b2b96be6f8550</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>251</id>
    <parentid>250</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Fork2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>91</id>
  <revision>
    <id>254</id>
    <parentid>253</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="342" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>709ea17830819087686e5d8078022613a6f7dda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Fork2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>92</id>
  <revision>
    <id>257</id>
    <parentid>256</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="334" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f76363264f4ea12034093c8aa01445c7b48eaa1a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:GRX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>93</id>
  <revision>
    <id>261</id>
    <parentid>260</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%)
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>28d6aa8af172f78f02ab3dd8a2ca1b320d0355bb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>94</id>
  <revision>
    <id>264</id>
    <parentid>263</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="710" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95cd78fb2d29b39017341c1614babd0983f90603</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to exodictionary user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>95</id>
  <revision>
    <id>267</id>
    <parentid>266</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:34Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exodictionary.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:exd:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>47e9eee7f978eff1cb587f64cc64a6d3a80ddfdb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>96</id>
  <revision>
    <id>271</id>
    <parentid>270</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="701" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d011ccaeac24c0c7db4e59bcd53e58d7015924c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to exoplatz user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>97</id>
  <revision>
    <id>275</id>
    <parentid>274</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="717" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Exoplatz.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:spacep:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Exoplatz.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6101e07ffe24823ffb1cbc49868cb13b1a9e2945</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>98</id>
  <revision>
    <id>279</id>
    <parentid>278</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="707" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3901efcd588c1e4d0ed079c826ed91cfc6cbb952</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to lunarpedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>99</id>
  <revision>
    <id>283</id>
    <parentid>282</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="723" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Lunarpedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:lunarp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Lunarpedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cb208176a4ef007d845bae2baf5cdfa37865f35f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>100</id>
  <revision>
    <id>287</id>
    <parentid>286</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="702" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cf9c333884370fd7bbb9ffe49af5778e09fb8c08</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to marspedia user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>101</id>
  <revision>
    <id>290</id>
    <parentid>289</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="718" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Marspedia.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:marsp:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6010b87cd480d7e8381ba5474a09f8ab22765624</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>102</id>
  <revision>
    <id>294</id>
    <parentid>293</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="711" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single userpage]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ffb8c361f57c42a488093eaec6aab0b701f4afad</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Go to scientifiction user talk</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>103</id>
  <revision>
    <id>298</id>
    <parentid>297</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="727" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | For ease of maintenance, {{PAGENAME}} has [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|a single user-talk page]] on '''Scientifiction.org'''.&lt;br&gt;
Click [[:sf:User_talk:{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}}|here]] to view this user's page.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:User templates|Scientifiction.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5fec2070785c1274d33204d3ad03fb826b8d03d6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Goto exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>104</id>
  <revision>
    <id>301</id>
    <parentid>300</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="736" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exodictionary.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[exd:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>56fed9133319a4f84bc09acc0406ccb74b7ce66c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Goto marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>105</id>
  <revision>
    <id>306</id>
    <parentid>305</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="800" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e24df3b024bff562bf0e475f1bba1a4752dafba6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Goto sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>106</id>
  <revision>
    <id>310</id>
    <parentid>309</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="738" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Scientifiction.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[sf:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.


[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d1005472edb3027bc4caecf4fbcce0504906f6c5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Goto space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>107</id>
  <revision>
    <id>315</id>
    <parentid>314</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="729" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article has been moved to '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>de99849cc4a6f040d00835eaed1345582b3ca545</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Help Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>108</id>
  <revision>
    <id>319</id>
    <parentid>318</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="433" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a help stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Help Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>977a37fb15ed65968790a0cf945e4f854a43ed93</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Hist Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>109</id>
  <revision>
    <id>323</id>
    <parentid>322</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a history stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>60a0f6258321f02b60dfb8396c3ef2277f44c41f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Historical Essay</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>110</id>
  <revision>
    <id>327</id>
    <parentid>326</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="610" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"&gt; 
{| style="font-size:8pt;padding:1pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFBF9F"
|[[Image:Apollo_09_David_Scott_podczas_lotu_Apollo_9_GPN-2000-001100.jpg|100px]]
|&lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a [[Oral_Histories_List|Historical Essay]]&lt;BR/&gt; Written and submitted by&lt;BR/&gt; {{{Author}}}.'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}


&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Historical Essays]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Essay Templates]]
[[Category:History Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>41545287697e690a56dd9b68768f72466a18e3e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Inappropriate</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>111</id>
  <revision>
    <id>332</id>
    <parentid>331</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="379" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this article is not appropriate for {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Inappropriate]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>02618803c3d31769b5dc1de7ca4f138a0ff0d43b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Infra Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>112</id>
  <revision>
    <id>336</id>
    <parentid>335</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="455" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an infrastructure stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Infrastructural Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f8e4d8c884cc062dcee9969e37b67df7b04bddd8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Initial Proof Needed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>113</id>
  <revision>
    <id>339</id>
    <parentid>338</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This autostub has not yet had its initial copyediting proof.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Initial Proof Needed]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5c8a2083b9d269504dee973c943062c13efb283a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Inst Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>114</id>
  <revision>
    <id>344</id>
    <parentid>343</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an institutional stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Institution Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>078ea9e7ff36f6590ded0e407f5994bb322880ea</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Land Claims</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>115</id>
  <revision>
    <id>350</id>
    <parentid>349</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="384" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|[[Image:Leica Lunar Survey.png|64px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;'''Land Claims'''&lt;BR/&gt;
(Scale of estimated claim security pending)
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Land Claims]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ce65db0ab018256329eaa319af347f956669392c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Launch Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>116</id>
  <revision>
    <id>354</id>
    <parentid>353</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a launch system stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Launch System Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>da7f5f6af6f22dbc46368009244e6e6e8167b7c6</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:License-Any</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>117</id>
  <revision>
    <id>359</id>
    <parentid>358</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="910" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF001F"&gt;'''?'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the as yet undetermined default license or licenses.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is obsolete as of the decision to segregate content into three separate namespaces and should not be used.  For content that you do not care about the license, put the article in the main namespace where it will be released to the public domain.

[[Category:License templates]]
[[Category:Obsolete Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e6ed7707be325921b9ce18745e7185b26ac734e2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:License-Any Attributive</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>118</id>
  <revision>
    <id>364</id>
    <parentid>363</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="840" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Attribution'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of any attributive license selected by the Moon Society.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have attribution for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate license.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dd2762ca9b6fa86b2a942a061d9c71a8d4c08068</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:License-GFDL</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>119</id>
  <revision>
    <id>368</id>
    <parentid>367</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="834" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''GFDL'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all subsequent modifications are free under the terms of the GNU Free Document License .&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles such as those derived from Wikipedia.  Not recommended for new articles, as it may result in their removal once a license policy is determined unless another, compatible license option is also available.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9dbf9d26c5f7bbed8c56eedc8dfcfec0d08926a3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:License-Public Domain</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>120</id>
  <revision>
    <id>373</id>
    <parentid>372</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="808" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#D7FFBF"&gt;'''Public Domain'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all articles and their revisions in the main namespace are released to the Public Domain and can be used when attribution or sharing of changes are not feasible.  Articles in in other namespaces, such as GFDL and CC Lunar are NOT released to the Public Domain.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
All Rights Released

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95af88b9b574c69b0e3045396f1a56eab0e5ad2b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:License-Sharealike</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>121</id>
  <revision>
    <id>377</id>
    <parentid>376</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:36Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="884" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; height: 8px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: right; color: #FF7F7F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#FFBFBF"&gt;'''Sharealike'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article and all modifications are free under the terms of any viral or share-alike license selected by the Moon Society, unless this template is removed.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
If you must have viral attributes for your article contribution.  Not recommended as it may result in your article's removal once a license policy is determined unless you also allow for an alternate licensing option.

[[Category:License templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c69f42d7b851afed7c7ef6df400dcdbb927801ab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Life Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>122</id>
  <revision>
    <id>381</id>
    <parentid>380</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a life support stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Life Support Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c126957d593a6ade9a0af50d06372c42033bc58</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>389</id>
    <parentid>388</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:LunarpediaLogoH512 43.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;

----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>07e996db42854a0520f63900581394d4a2d68163</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:MMM</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>124</id>
  <revision>
    <id>393</id>
    <parentid>392</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;includeonly&gt;[[Category:Moon Miners' Manifesto based articles]]&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2952cef88792eb54d67b8dde5c3b58c9c5039d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Maint Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>125</id>
  <revision>
    <id>397</id>
    <parentid>396</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a site maintenance stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Maintenance Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bd5920562c075613f7b1c06fd0bf8d7b04097943</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Map Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>126</id>
  <revision>
    <id>401</id>
    <parentid>400</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a planetographical stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Planetographical Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>604b56d79e818c60f5bbc5fd0ffa81a053e2980a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>127</id>
  <revision>
    <id>407</id>
    <parentid>406</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="353" xml:space="preserve">[[marsp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Mplogo H320 0448 sanstxt.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{marsp|Mars Pathfinder|Mars Pathfinder Mission}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>85ae02afe6127037e1867d629f4c9cdaa42b6fcb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Mediawiki</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>128</id>
  <revision>
    <id>413</id>
    <parentid>412</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="897" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on mediawiki.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Mediawiki|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.mediawiki.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Mediawiki:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Mediawiki, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the mediawiki.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a1b1a3285932661631b7ac787d8d8a69f4dddcf8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Mirrored from space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>129</id>
  <revision>
    <id>416</id>
    <parentid>415</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="805" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 60px; height: 60px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Exoplatz.png|60px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | &lt;SMALL&gt;This article is mirrored from '''Exoplatz.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
To edit it, please first click [[spacep:{{PAGENAME}}|here]] to go to it.  You will need an account on Exoplatz.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Mirror Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a92c7fd102ae911a7607c6e8b1d93433e8bf270b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Mission Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>130</id>
  <revision>
    <id>420</id>
    <parentid>419</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a mission or probe stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Mission and Probe Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>deb26e05e707d8729823c44fc9279bcbf4171340</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Move2exd</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>131</id>
  <revision>
    <id>426</id>
    <parentid>425</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="319" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to ExoDictionary.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt; 

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to ExoDictionary]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f5331008328435c1396334aa83d7e45764bc0cb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Move2lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>132</id>
  <revision>
    <id>431</id>
    <parentid>430</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="310" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#3F3F3F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Lunarpedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Lunarpedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>181c4b459d2944dee02c8ad499ba3ad44954c5fa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141733|218">
  <title>Template:Move2marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>133</id>
  <revision>
    <id>436</id>
    <parentid>435</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="308" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#7F0000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Marspedia.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Marspedia]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f661fdd6e7b63655f9fd30f7de009f6299e1bb40</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Move2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>134</id>
  <revision>
    <id>441</id>
    <parentid>440</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="322" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to Scientifiction]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0e786f9d8a1823f83c0ca2eee73f6cdadd174fb3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Move2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>135</id>
  <revision>
    <id>446</id>
    <parentid>445</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''This article is tagged for relocation to the Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Move to General Space]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ba9c521979e95a9005ca22032fe3e84e4eef1645</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>450</id>
    <parentid>449</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on {{SITENAME}} is community provided.  Neither {{SITENAME}} nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fbf47935b25f7c3ab8baa3c0d5246c2d93d6ccab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Offtopic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>137</id>
  <revision>
    <id>455</id>
    <parentid>454</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="372" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this article is not on topic for {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Possibly Off Topic]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>10a1133b98e1b84221c49de8ba124ef28a222efb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:On marsp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>138</id>
  <revision>
    <id>459</id>
    <parentid>458</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="796" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
|&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
| style="width: 80px; height: 80px; background: #fff; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|80px]]
| style="font-size: 10pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This article is located on '''Marspedia.org'''. &lt;BR/&gt;
Click [[:marsp:{{PAGENAME}}|Here]] to go to it.&lt;BR /&gt;
Click [[Marspedia|Here]] for more information about Marspedia.
|}
&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template will probably only work with main namespace articles.

[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Redirect Pages]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2458688bdb8cbce7dfcd681f215b05cd46754875</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Online Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>139</id>
  <revision>
    <id>463</id>
    <parentid>462</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="460" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an online resource or community stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Online Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>57862629552ce6365dea5dccb138b151ff009e8f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Org Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>140</id>
  <revision>
    <id>467</id>
    <parentid>466</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="454" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is an organizational stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Organizational Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>bf72b30d941ec30a546d450665c92676d5b75073</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:PD Violation</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>141</id>
  <revision>
    <id>472</id>
    <parentid>471</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="886" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: This article may have content that is not in the public domain!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the problem content can be identified, please remove it immediately!
*If not already relocated, this article should be moved outside of the main namespace.
*If the content can not be identified, rewrite this article from scratch with the assumption that the entire article is in someone else's copyright.  Upon completion of such a rewrite, delete this article.&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d4628753d11cd711a087d3124571f19e3c5e92e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:PD notice</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>142</id>
  <revision>
    <id>476</id>
    <parentid>475</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="color:#000000; border:solid 1px #A8A8A8; padding:0.5em 1em 0.5em 0.7em; margin:0.5em 0em; background-color:#FFFFFF;font-size:90%; vertical-align:middle;"&gt;
[[Image:PD-icon.svg|20px|left]]'''Important note:''' When you edit this text, you agree to release your contribution in the public domain&lt;!-- [[w:Public domain|public domain]] --&gt;. If you don't want this, please don't edit. 
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:License templates|PD notice]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9d28c2ed6ddd9909eb5cf6727218e4ec00ca406e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Pending</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>143</id>
  <revision>
    <id>480</id>
    <parentid>479</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="479" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is about a pending event, and the information here is prone to change or obsolescence.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Pending Events]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>4ce4d5801c8b074b953a3818a0cfee0ef6606cbf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Physics Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>144</id>
  <revision>
    <id>486</id>
    <parentid>485</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:38Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="442" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a physics stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Physics Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ee0f209e046f3cf77f9d2e1393f3c45a15ad3af5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Possibly Obsolete</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>145</id>
  <revision>
    <id>490</id>
    <parentid>489</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="360" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is potentially obsolete.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} updating]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1f0b5d54296435ee41dabaed9b41785f3cf1664f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Pub Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>146</id>
  <revision>
    <id>494</id>
    <parentid>493</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="457" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a book or publication stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Publication Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d503b1b6b9a1ec6a1339dda19e4c7f90017a3f1f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:RBX</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>147</id>
  <revision>
    <id>498</id>
    <parentid>497</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1084" xml:space="preserve">border:1px {{{border|#3F3F3F}}} solid; background:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background-color:{{{legacy|#EFEFEF}}}; background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(6%,{{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}}), color-stop(88%,{{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}}));  background: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -o-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: -ms-linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); background: linear-gradient(top, {{{topcolor|#DFDFDF}}} 6%, {{{botcolor|#FFFFFF}}} 88%); -webkit-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -moz-border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -khtml-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; -opera-border-radius:  {{{radius|1em}}}; border-radius: {{{radius|1em}}}; -webkit-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; -moz-box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000; box-shadow: 0.5em 0.5em 1em #000000
&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Text Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>32ec49776c9f1bafa1fc0b1cd089192b42447cba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Ref Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>148</id>
  <revision>
    <id>502</id>
    <parentid>501</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="446" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a reference stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Reference Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e0132bbc737da08f430931bab2b658b16b3a076e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Reference Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>149</id>
  <revision>
    <id>507</id>
    <parentid>506</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="569" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
This [[:Category:References|reference]] article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b97207aee7f6aba50393691c7c8b7a6c51a4020e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Remove to list</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>150</id>
  <revision>
    <id>511</id>
    <parentid>510</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="509" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFBF9F;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
A {{SITENAME}} editor believes that this subminimal stub should be listed as an entry in a bootstrap list and temporarily removed.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;If any amount of useful content is added here, please remove this tag. 
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Remove to Bootstrap List]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6a32f6855b9d2d713782bdcf3dfc92f933b88ba8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Resource Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>151</id>
  <revision>
    <id>515</id>
    <parentid>514</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a resource stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Resource Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9352a14f13fa15ea82142180457f3a4313c0324d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Restricted Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>152</id>
  <revision>
    <id>518</id>
    <parentid>517</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="307" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
|- style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" 
| {| 
| [[Image:Warning Sign.png|64px]]
| This image is available under restrictive terms.  Please ensure that they are adhered to.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

[[Category:License tags]]</text>
    <sha1>ae073185b0cf771be142c8fc744606fe3debe5a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Rough</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>153</id>
  <revision>
    <id>521</id>
    <parentid>520</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:7pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This page is full of rough and unformatted information or ideas.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} working it into an article]&lt;/span&gt;'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c333fe6678bd86eff933cb4bff2d1ee05dc803d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>528</id>
    <parentid>527</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fce308332aac7aefe379e3799203b320cca73382</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Selene Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>155</id>
  <revision>
    <id>532</id>
    <parentid>531</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="451" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a Selenological stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Selenological Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6371e081983f61fe62ceda866fc6b6c486b7abfe</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Settle Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>156</id>
  <revision>
    <id>536</id>
    <parentid>535</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a settlement stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Settlement Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f1490ab991fd3633a6bd2f126d117f1d1e642499</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>541</id>
    <parentid>540</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exoproject Rocket Inverted 14px.png]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cd2379ab44ba71964f23894570ac10801f8858c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>14</id>
  <revision>
    <id>549</id>
    <parentid>25</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="350" xml:space="preserve">[[{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{space|List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters|historical rockets}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c704173fcfb0fa9c3748fe379028dc97f0ce9392</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Space Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>158</id>
  <revision>
    <id>553</id>
    <parentid>552</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a space stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5ece8ec97e62d88df98b864d3a9ff44f53de62b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Spec Melt</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>159</id>
  <revision>
    <id>556</id>
    <parentid>555</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="320" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This specification is being reevaluated or is in need of replacement'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e88d91770ea3fb8d1b1278629fd9d1d50c78e45c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Still Coming Together</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>160</id>
  <revision>
    <id>559</id>
    <parentid>558</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="299" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 2px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|[[Image:Still Coming Together.png|96px]] 
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFFFFF;font-size:16pt;"&gt; This Lunarpedia Feature is still coming together.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>71ccaf40524545a62db4e54e89968813dd99fe6d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>161</id>
  <revision>
    <id>569</id>
    <parentid>568</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="522" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV&gt; style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | &lt;SMALL&gt;'''This article is a stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it or sorting it into the correct [[Lunarpedia:Stubs|stub subcategory]].'''&lt;/SMALL&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Stubs to be Sorted]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6e9e17ee54a2960c5f97608a2ae4d3c61f023811</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Subminimal</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>162</id>
  <revision>
    <id>573</id>
    <parentid>572</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:5pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article has no or virtually no content.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} adding]&lt;/span&gt; something to it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Subminimal Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>133422e0edc56eb3c6fbffc545c361f73d37abd5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Test Autostub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>163</id>
  <revision>
    <id>578</id>
    <parentid>577</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="522" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article is an automatically generated stub.  As such it may contain serious errors. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding or correcting]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;!-- Real autostub will include stub category link(s) here --&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5412fa0e98bfa92f8947af1b00079130755baff4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Trans Stub</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>164</id>
  <revision>
    <id>582</id>
    <parentid>581</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This article is a transportation stub.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Transportation Stubs]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Stub Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b3ade4ddc505eaae6f6d52d6fe5ba139fa5fca28</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Undescribed</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>165</id>
  <revision>
    <id>586</id>
    <parentid>585</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="464" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;"
|&lt;DIV style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;This category lacks a description.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} providing]&lt;/span&gt; one.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Undescribed Categories]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;!-- [[Category:Stub Templates]] --&gt;
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a2499d6dfbbfaa028f91d3a6d8881e0259b28520</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Unencyclopedic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>166</id>
  <revision>
    <id>590</id>
    <parentid>589</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="470" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This article may not have sufficiently encyclopedic formatting or tone.  You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} formatting, editing, or reworking ]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2ed1f751ba2b24af3743da1bc0cf03ed4e81932a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Unknown Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>167</id>
  <revision>
    <id>594</id>
    <parentid>593</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="686" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #000000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #BF0000 2px;margin:2px;"&gt;
{| 
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFFF7F" | &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BF0000"&gt;'''WARNING: The licencing terms of this image are not known!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
*If the terms have not been determined after a reasonable amount of time, block or delete this image.&lt;BR/&gt;
*If the image is clearly dubious, block or delete the image immediately.
&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;'''
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Violations]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Violation Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>03c156dfa57d1f1a1b6b69d39bed6d478c31fcba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Unknown Terms</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>168</id>
  <revision>
    <id>597</id>
    <parentid>596</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:40Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="503" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This terms under which this image is available for use are unknown.  You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} identifying]&lt;/span&gt; them or deleting or marking for deletion this image.'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Unknown Term Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31ba2ec45aedff407dccea02ffc526f2bff23b66</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Userbox Bot</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>169</id>
  <revision>
    <id>600</id>
    <parentid>599</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="float:left;border:solid #0F00BF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#0F00BF;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#FFFFFF" | [[Image:Public Domain robot toy.png|43px]]
| &lt;FONT style="font-size:12pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;"&gt;'''This user is a Bot'''&lt;/FONT&gt;
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR clear="all"/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>925f9383a2ab3969550041af32f12bd2c4f81279</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Userbox FOSS</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>170</id>
  <revision>
    <id>603</id>
    <parentid>602</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="581" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; 
background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px #000000 solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #9d4654; 
text-align: center; color: white;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''FOSS'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; 
border: 1px #AF0F00 solid; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This person uses '''Free and Open Source Software''' exclusively
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Userboxes]]
[[Category:HTML Userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>31098671f55dba48b27986e33724d7593200cc79</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Wikify</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>171</id>
  <revision>
    <id>610</id>
    <parentid>609</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>6 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="561" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:300px"&gt;
{| style="width:300px"
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;text-align:center;width=300px" | '''This article is not yet properly formatted. &lt;BR/&gt; You can help {{SITENAME}} by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} Editing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.  &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;SMALL&gt;Please remove this template when it is sufficiently well formatted.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Cleanup]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8cbb83002e6366878d93e8c9cdd459bac36ac2cc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:Wikipedia</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>172</id>
  <revision>
    <id>614</id>
    <parentid>613</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="672" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #F9F9F9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px;"&gt;
&lt;div style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#DFBF7F"&gt;'''WP'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from [http://wikipedia.org Wikipedia].&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Wikipedia Based Articles]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

'''Usage:'''&lt;BR/&gt;
For articles derived from Wikipedia.

[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>cc34e93fb039b3b17b0903aa046fc3d5ed1fef92</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>Template:WikipediaLink</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>173</id>
  <revision>
    <id>617</id>
    <parentid>616</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:17:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported: Migration of surviving templates and categories</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="905" xml:space="preserve">{{ #ifeq:
  {{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| [[{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]
| [http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{urlencode:{{{1}}}}} {{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]
}}&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
This template links to a page on wikipedia.org from the [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]. The template has two parameters:
# Pagename
# (optional) Link description

Examples: 
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
*&lt;nowiki&gt;{{WikipediaLink|Page_Title|text}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;


{{ #ifeq:
{{SERVERNAME}}
| www.wikipedia.org
| This is so that the public domain help pages - which can be freely copied and included in other sites - have correct links to Wikipedia:
* on external sites, it creates an external link
* on Wikipedia, it creates an internal link

'''All''' links from the Help namespace to other parts of the wikipedia.org wiki should use this template.}}


[[Category:Attribution Templates]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]

&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1a10925a93d9bf516ff275992adecef639a3b139</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>MediaWiki:Sidebar</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>5</id>
  <revision>
    <id>618</id>
    <parentid>40</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:27:30Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reverting to Exoplatz version</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="349" xml:space="preserve">*Navigation
**mainpage|mainpage
**Category:Main|Browse
**helppage|help
**List of Lists|Needed Articles
**Exoplatz:Sandbox|Sand Box
**recentchanges-url|recentchanges
**randompage-url|randompage
**Special:Search|Search
*Interwiki
**lunarp:Main_Page|Lunarpedia
**marsp:Main_Page|Marspedia
**exd:Main_Page|ExoDictionary
**sf:Main_Page|Scientifiction.org</text>
    <sha1>e0e99ee2ef85f166b2b36fa04247bb514444e78d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>619</id>
    <parentid>618</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:28:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Tinkering</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="374" xml:space="preserve">*Navigation
**mainpage|mainpage
**Category:Main|Browse by Category
**helppage|help
**List of Lists|Needed Articles
**Exoplatz:Sandbox|Sand Box
**recentchanges-url|recentchanges
**randompage-url|randompage
**Special:Search|Search
*Related Wikis
**lunarp:Main_Page|Lunarpedia
**marsp:Main_Page|Marspedia
**exd:Main_Page|ExoDictionary
&lt;!-- **sf:Main_Page|Scientifiction.org --&gt;</text>
    <sha1>b1d2af38e5dac8230cbc879134e1a099c5c5e4b5</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>User:Strangelv</title>
  <ns>2</ns>
  <id>174</id>
  <revision>
    <id>621</id>
    <parentid>620</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="610" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--
{| style="align: right; float: right; border: 0px" cellspacing = 0
|{{User Past Director}}
|-
|{{User 3 Digit}}
|-
|{{User Sysop}}
|-
|{{User Server Admin}}
|-
|} --&gt;

'''James Gholston''' is Moon Society secretary and has been involved with the Artemis and Moon Societies since 1999 and was appointed to fill an unexpired term on the Board of Directors in 2006, serving until the end of the 2007-2009 term.

He presently serves as a sysop for [http://lpedia.org LPedia], as vice chair of the Denton County LP, and as the District 30 representative on the [http://lptexas.org/state-leadership Texas SLEC].</text>
    <sha1>e1a34b97999c4ae4d63edd4af37d8009c1b24c33</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Apollo 09 David Scott podczas lotu Apollo 9 GPN-2000-001100.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>175</id>
  <revision>
    <id>623</id>
    <parentid>622</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="162" xml:space="preserve">[[David Scott]] during the [[Apollo 9]] mission

Public domain NASA image

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Photos]]
[[Category:Public Domain Photos]]</text>
    <sha1>2993d0f3e54b60002ae75c36affec9b976b18761</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Bootstrap1.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>176</id>
  <revision>
    <id>625</id>
    <parentid>624</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:11Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="80" xml:space="preserve">{{PD-self}}

Pulling up by a literal bootstrap

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]</text>
    <sha1>fabd64b1dcceb343f34b1eb1f40c5953f2b1dd7f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>177</id>
  <revision>
    <id>628</id>
    <parentid>627</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Copyright Review Block.svg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>178</id>
  <revision>
    <id>633</id>
    <parentid>632</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="169" xml:space="preserve">Unlike most images that might expect to get this for an update, this image is released to the public domain

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>7a81c14ced5d9c734dbeb9a3bcd6592e543f7ea8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Exoplatz.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>179</id>
  <revision>
    <id>635</id>
    <parentid>634</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="93" xml:space="preserve">This is the temporary logo for Exoplatz, the general space wiki.

[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>c50dd840e5c1c2b8f34d432571be13c2f80b1f1c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408141738|441">
  <title>File:Mearns.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>180</id>
  <revision>
    <id>637</id>
    <parentid>636</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="86" xml:space="preserve">Graphic that comes from a source that says it is ok to use provided it is acknowledged</text>
    <sha1>b26be7d807be74118513bd3e7a3490bfdb10ee9b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>File:Still Coming Together.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>181</id>
  <revision>
    <id>639</id>
    <parentid>638</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="161" xml:space="preserve">Warning: Still Coming Together

2007 James Gholston

Heck with it.  Releasing to the public domain.

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]
[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>b0f0bc63b43d49b5fe95173cdb903c1c145c9bee</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1120</id>
    <parentid>639</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T22:11:59Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded [[File:Still Coming Together.png]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="161" xml:space="preserve">Warning: Still Coming Together

2007 James Gholston

Heck with it.  Releasing to the public domain.

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]
[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>b0f0bc63b43d49b5fe95173cdb903c1c145c9bee</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>AIAA Calendar</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>182</id>
  <revision>
    <id>647</id>
    <parentid>646</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="203" xml:space="preserve">The AIAA ([[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]])
has an ongoing series of conferences.

[http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=1 AIAA Calendar]

{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>ee0b0c436eaff1e4d24d7df74c7f85c14124a8df</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Ablating Material</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>183</id>
  <revision>
    <id>660</id>
    <parentid>659</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>12 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1453" xml:space="preserve">An '''ablating material''' is a material, especially a coating material, designed to provide thermal protection to a body in a fluid stream through loss of mass.

Ablating materials are used on the surfaces of some reentry vehicles to absorb heat by removal of mass, thus blocking the transfer of heat to the rest of the vehicle and maintaining temperatures within design limits. Ablating materials absorb heat by increasing in temperature and changing in chemical or physical state. The heat is carried away from the surface by a loss of mass (liquid or vapor). The departing mass also blocks part of the convective heat transfer to the remaining material in the same manner as [[Transpiration Cooling|transpiration cooling]]. 

It should be noted that use of ablating material for heat shields has two significant drawbacks:  first, the mass of the material must either be carried throughout the mission (at an attendant penalty to payload capacity) or must be installed immediately before reentry (adding greatly to complexity and raising safety concerns if, for whatever reason, the installation fails) and, second, the coating is a single-use component, making it unattractive as an option on reusable vehicles.

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''

{{Physics Stub}}

[[Category:NASA SP-7]]
[[Category:Spacecraft Construction]]
[[Category:Re-entry]]
[[Category:Rocketry]]</text>
    <sha1>9e64c2763fb52d5176219f5a6ec8e668a9b539c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>184</id>
  <revision>
    <id>671</id>
    <parentid>670</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="903" xml:space="preserve">
The '''American Ephemeris And Nautical Almanac''' is an annual publication of the U.S. Naval Observatory, containing
elaborate tables of the predicted positions of various celestial
bodies and other data of use to astronomers and navigators.
&lt;BR/&gt; '' Beginning with the editions for 1960, The American Ephemeris
and Nautical Almanac issued by the Nautical Almanac Office, United
States Naval Observatory, and the Astronomical Ephemeris issued
by H.M. Nautical Almanac Office, Royal Greenwich Observatory,
were unified. With the exception of a few introductory pages,
the two publications are identical; they are printed separately
in the two countries, from reproducible material prepared partly
in the United States of America and partly in the United Kingdom. '' 

==References==
''This article is based on NASA's [[NASA SP-7|Dictionary of Technical Terms for Aerospace Use]]''
[[Category:NASA SP-7]]</text>
    <sha1>1fecb07f8d44011e23c84880345ca650189f40e4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>American Rocket Company</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>7</id>
  <revision>
    <id>684</id>
    <parentid>17</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>12 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="544" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1985 by Jim Bennett, the American Rocket Company, or AMROC, was a company that developed hybrid rocket motors.

It had over 200 hybrid rocket motor test firings ranging from 4.5 kN to 1.1 MN at NASA's Stennis Space Center's E1 test stand.

Amroc planned to develop the Industrial Launch Vehicle (ILV).

Its 5 October 1989 launch of the SET-1 sounding rocket was unsuccessful.

The company became insolvent and was shut down in 1995. Its intellectual property was acquired in 1999 by SpaceDev, and its lineage is part of SpaceShipOne.</text>
    <sha1>f7b8c2421df2da3099e41fe04912b675f508db69</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>British Interplanetary Society</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>10</id>
  <revision>
    <id>699</id>
    <parentid>21</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>14 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="875" xml:space="preserve">Founded in 1933, the British Interplanetary Society (or 'BIS') is the world's oldest society dedicated to spaceflight. Despite the name, the BIS is international in membership. It publishes a technical journal, Journal of British Interplanetary Society, a monthly general interest magazine, Spaceflight, a twice-yearly magazine on the history of spaceflight, Space Chronicle, and a magazine for children, Voyage. Their motto is "From imagination to reality."

The sister society to the BIS, the American Interplanetary Society, was founded in 1930. It still exists in the form of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, following its merger with the American Institute of Aerospace Sciences. 

==External Links==
[http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/index.htm BIS website]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Interplanetary_Society Wikipedia article] on the BIS</text>
    <sha1>1f6d0f531bb466e4d5707a75d694478496bbe509</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>ESTEC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>185</id>
  <revision>
    <id>709</id>
    <parentid>708</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="542" xml:space="preserve">The '''European Space Research and Technology Centre''' manages most non-booster [[European Space Agency]] projects.  It is located in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

It is involved with satellites and the [[International Space Station]].

{{Inst Stub}}

==Produced by ESTEC==
* [[Automated Transfer Vehicle]]
* [[Columbus laboratory]]
* The ''[[Jules Verne (space ship)|''Jules Verne]]''
* [[Giove-a]]


==External Links==
* [http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMOMQ374OD_index_0.html ESTEC site]

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]</text>
    <sha1>756f4fad0e0ef3c672031b0c54275db0e75f2e0c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Hamaguir</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>186</id>
  <revision>
    <id>721</id>
    <parentid>720</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>11 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="149" xml:space="preserve">Launch site in Algeria used to launch satellites via the French [[Diamant]] launch vehicle.  No longer in use.

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>1bc110786856c8fe5757116148b6704366f0c296</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>IEEE Aerospace 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>187</id>
  <revision>
    <id>732</id>
    <parentid>731</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:13Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="132" xml:space="preserve">Big Sky, MT, March 3 - 10

http://www.aeroconf.org/

Cosponsored by [[IEEE]] and [[AIAA]]

{{Subminimal}}


[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>da422a999c186227a27684cb6e3f0cf2fb475e49</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>ISDC</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>9</id>
  <revision>
    <id>740</id>
    <parentid>20</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="56" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[International Space Development Conference]]</text>
    <sha1>2aade149fbfae2096d46f1ecfc24db4effc28b4c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Index.php</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>188</id>
  <revision>
    <id>742</id>
    <parentid>741</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="23" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Main Page]]</text>
    <sha1>c222ad63e9e6a1e286ff83e0861447ce17bf759f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>International Space Development Conference 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>189</id>
  <revision>
    <id>753</id>
    <parentid>752</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="874" xml:space="preserve">The 2007 [[ISDC|International Space Development Conference]] was held in Addison, Texas, May 24-28, 2007.  The theme was 50 Years of Space Flight

{{Event Stub}}

==Speakers and Guests==
*[[Eric Anderson]]
*[[Peter Banks]]
*[[Jim Benson]]
*[[Robert Bigelow]]
*[[Brian Binnie]]
*[[John Carmack]]
*[[Michael Coates]]
*[[Hugh Downs]]
*[[Art Dula]]
*[[Stephen Fleming]]
*[[Lori Garver]]
*[[John Higginbotham]]
*[[Rick Homans]]
*[[Scott Hubbard]]
*[[Gary Hudson]]
*[[Greg Kulka]]
*[[Nick Lampson]]
*[[Laurie Leshin]]
*[[Shannon Lucid]]
*[[Larry Niven]]
*[[Tim Pickens]]
*[[Kim Stanley Robinson]]
*[[Rusty Schweickart]]
*[[Donna Shirley]]
*[[Paul Spudis]]
*[[Steve Squyres]]
*[[Jeff Volosin]]
*[[Stu Witt]]
*[[Pete Worden]]
*[[Robert Zubrin]]


&lt;!-- ==Papers==
The call for papers is presently in effect. --&gt;


==External Link==
http://isdc.nss.org/2007/

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>8090af75f9cedff50db54a75f2343e56860b256f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Inverted-aerobraking</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>190</id>
  <revision>
    <id>767</id>
    <parentid>766</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>13 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="565" xml:space="preserve">'''Inverted Aerobraking''' is a proposal for a medium to far future alternative solution to launch spaceships

On New Year's Eve 2006, [[Dr. Alex Walthem]] mentioned the "Reverse Aerobrake" idea on the Artemis List.

This idea is described in some detail at this web site:

http://www.walthelm.net/inverted-aerobraking/

One source of material for this approach could be derived from [[lunar regolith]].   Another source might be Near Earth Asteroids.


{{stub}}

[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Missions]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>d653b1ea2195e1d242653a2eaae97ff8b20a233c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>191</id>
  <revision>
    <id>776</id>
    <parentid>775</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>8 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="272" xml:space="preserve">The larger of two government space research agencies in Japan.

Sponsors the [[SELENE]] lunar orbiter spacecraft as well as the [[H-IIA]] and [[H-IIB]] launch vehicles, and module for the [[International Space Station|ISS]]

[[Category:Organizations]]
[[Category:Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ba2840a8cfb12964a8c546a26210380509b59fda</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>John Glenn Research Center</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>192</id>
  <revision>
    <id>787</id>
    <parentid>786</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>10 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1239" xml:space="preserve">The '''NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field''' (usually referred to as ''NASA Glenn'', or ''GRC'') is one of the research and development centers ("Field Centers") set up by [[NASA]].

NASA Glenn was established in 1941 as the ''National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory''. When NACA dissolved and NASA was established in 1958, it became the NASA Lewis Research Center. It was officially renamed the John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field in 1999.

In addition to a major role in aeronautics research, NASA Glenn is a center for research on space power and propulsion, communications, and microgravity.  Its heritage in the field of space propulsion heritage the development of the liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket engine, considered by Von Braun to be one of the key technologies to the success of the [[Apollo]] program in landing humans on the moon, and the development of advanced space propulsion technologies such as the ion engine, which was first developed and tested by NASA Lewis (now Glenn) scientists.

==External LInks==
*[http://www.grc.nasa.gov NASA Glenn Home page]

{{Inst Stub}}

[[Category:Research Centers]]
[[Category:Institutions]]
[[Category:NASA]]</text>
    <sha1>446fd39a7ca50affa7dfa08db1272e916f50eeb8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>13</id>
  <revision>
    <id>826</id>
    <parentid>24</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>38 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="2384" xml:space="preserve">==Cancelled after achieving orbit==
'''Note: when an entire family was canceled only the final version is listed - date of last orbital flight.'''

===European Union===
*{{space|Ariane-4|Ariane-4}} - February 15, 2003

====United Kingdom====
*{{space|Black Arrow|Black Arrow}} - October 28, 1971 

====France====
*{{space|Diamant-BP4|Diamant-BP4}} - September 27, 1975

===Russia/USSR===
*{{space|Energia|Energia}}/{{space|Buran|Buran}} - November 15, 1988

===USA===
*{{space|Athena-2|Athena-2}} - September 24, 1999
*{{space|Jupiter-C|Jupiter-C}} - May 24, 1961
*{{space|Saturn-1b|Saturn-1b}} - July 15, 1975
*{{space|Saturn-V|Saturn-V}} - May 14, 1973 (see {{lunarp|Apollo|Apollo}})
*{{space|Scout-G|Scout-G}} - May 9, 1994
*{{space|Titan-IV|Titan-IV}} -  October 19, 2005
*{{space|Vanguard|Vanguard}} - September 18, 1959

===Japan===
*{{space|Lambda-4|Lambda-4}} - February 11, 1970


==Cancelled after unsuccessful orbital attempt(s)==
===USA===
*{{space|Conestoga|Conestoga}}

===Europe/ELDO===
*{{space|Europa-II|Europa-II}}

===Russia/USSR ===
*{{space|N-1|N-1}}

==Cancelled after successful Suborbital launches, with orbital launches planned==
===Germany===
*{{space|Otrag|Otrag}} 

==Unsuccessful Suborbital launch attempt(s) (orbital launches planned)==
===USA===
*{{space|Dolphin|Dolphin}}
*{{space|SET-1 sounding rocket|SET-1 sounding rocket}} (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) 
*{{space|Percheron|Percheron}} 


==No launches attempted==
===Russia===
*{{space|Burlak|Burlak}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Maks|Maks}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===USA===
*{{space|Beal Aerospace BA-2|Beal Aerospace BA-2}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Colt|Black Colt}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Black Horse|Black Horse}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Excalibur|Excalibur}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Industrial Launch Vehicle|Industrial Launch Vehicle}}  (see also {{space|American Rocket Company|American Rocket Company}}) &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Liberty|Liberty}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Nova|Nova}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Phoenix|Phoenix}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Roton|Roton}} &lt;br&gt;
*{{space|Sea Dragon|Sea Dragon}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Venturestar|Venturestar}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-30|X-30}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|X-33|X-33}} 
*{{space|X-34|X-34}} &lt;BR/&gt;

===European Union===
*{{space|Hotol|Hotol}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Mustard|Mustard}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Rombus|Rombus}} &lt;BR/&gt;
*{{space|Saenger|Saenger}} &lt;BR/&gt;


[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:History]]</text>
    <sha1>6459e7bd82c227f5139acadd81648cfeafe3f101</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>List of Launch Sites</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>15</id>
  <revision>
    <id>852</id>
    <parentid>26</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:15Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>25 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1198" xml:space="preserve">==Licensed==

*[[Alacantra]]

*[[Baikonur]]

* [[Borisoglebsk]] (Submarine)

*[[California Spaceport]]

*[[Cape Canaveral AFS]] (CCAFS)

*[[Centre Spatial Guyanais]]

*[[Churchill]]

*[[Eastern Test Range]] (Comprises CCAFS, Florida Spaceport and KSC)

*[[Florida Spaceport]]

*[[Jiuquan]]

*[[Kapustin Yar]]

*[[Kennedy Space Center]] (NASA KSC)

*[[Kwajelin]]

*[[Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Mojave Spaceport]] 

*[[Odyssey]] deep ocean floating mobile platform operated by [[Sea Launch LLC]]

*[[Palmachim]]

*[[Plesetsk]]

*[[Poker Flats]]

*[[San Marco]]

*[[Southwest Regional Spaceport]]

*[[Sriharikota]] Satish Dhawan Space Centre (SDSC) SHAR

*[[Stargazer]] L-1011 carrier aircraft 

*[[Svbodny]]

*[[Tanegashima]]

*[[Vandenburg AFB]] (VAFB)

*[[Western Test Range]] (Comprises California Spaceport and VAFB)

*[[White Sands AFB]]

*[[Woomera]]

==Unlicensed==

[[Category:Transportation]]

*[[Hamaguir]] (retired)

*[[NASA B-52B]] (retired) registration number 52-0008 (NASA tail number 008),

==See Also==

[[List of Launch System Vendors]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[List of Space Facilities]]&lt;BR/&gt;
[[NASA]]&lt;BR/&gt;

[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Spaceports]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>a5cae85afd7246526ae4d88b9ec02c07b976bfa8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>List of Launch Systems and Vendors</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>17</id>
  <revision>
    <id>917</id>
    <parentid>28</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>64 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="16061" xml:space="preserve">=HISTORICAL LAUNCHERS=

[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]&lt;BR/&gt;

=EXISTING LAUNCHERS (Achieved Orbit)=

==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 2|Long March 2}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 3|Long March 3}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Long March 4|Long March 4}}  || Currently in service || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ariane 5|Ariane 5}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com] ||
|-
| {{space|Ariane 4|Ariane 4}}  || Retired || {{space|Arianespace|Arianespace}} [http://www.arianespace.com/ http://www.arianespace.com]  ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==India==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|PSLV|Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV)}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||

|-
| {{space|GSLV|Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV)}} {{space|GSLV III|GSLV III}} || Currently in service || {{space|Indian Space Research Organization|Indian Space Research Organization}} [http://www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in ] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==International==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} (Sea Launch version) - see Ukraine || Currently in service || {{space|Sea Launch|Sea Launch}} [http://www.sea-launch.com/ http://www.sea-launch.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-
|}


==Israel==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shavit|Shavit}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Israeli Aircraft Industries|Israeli Aircraft Industries}} [http://www.iai.co.il/ http://www.iai.co.il/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Japan==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|H-IIA|H-IIA}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
|-

| {{space|H-IIB|H-IIB}} || Currently in service  || {{space|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency|Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)}} [http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Cosmos-3M|Cosmos-3M}} || Currently in service || {{space|PO Polyot|PO Polyot}} [http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm http://www.omsk.net.ru/arm/polyot.htm ] ||
|-
| {{space|Dnepr|Dnepr}} || Currently in service || {{space|ISC Kosmotras|ISC Kosmotras}} [http://www.kosmotras.ru/ http://www.kosmotras.ru/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Molniya|Molniya}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] || ||
|-
| {{space|Volna|Volna}} aka {{space|Priboy/Surf|Priboy/Surf}} || Currently in service || {{space|SRC Makeyev|SRC Makeyev}} [http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm/  http://www.makeyev.ru/english/start.htm] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Proton|Proton}} || Currently in service || {{space|International Launch Services|International Launch Services}} [http://www.ilslaunch.com/ http://www.ilslaunch.com/]
 ||
|-
| {{space|Rokot|Rokot}} || Currently in service || {{space|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH|EUROCKOT Launch Services GmbH}} [http://www.eurockot.com/ http://www.eurockot.com/ ] ||
|-
| {{space|Soyuz (launch vehicle)|Soyuz}} || Currently in service || {{space|Starsem|Starsem}}[http://www.starsem.com/ http://www.starsem.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Start-1|Start-1}} || Currently in service || {{space|Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology|oscow Institute of Thermal Technology}} ||
|-

|-
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Ukraine==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Tsyklon|Tsyklon}} || Currently in service || {{space|PA Yuzhmash|PA Yuzhmash}} [http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm http://www.yuzhmash.com/index_en.htm] ||

|-

| {{lunarp|Zenit|Zenit}} || Currently in service ||  [http://www.russianspaceweb.com/zenit.html Yuzhnoe Design Bureau] (see also [http://www.sea-launch.com/ Sea Launch]  ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{marsp|Atlas V|Atlas V}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Lockheed Martin|Lockheed Martin}} [http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ http://www.lockheedmartin.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta II|Delta II}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{marsp|Delta IV|Delta IV}} || Currently in service || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Minotaur|Minotaur}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Boeing}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Pegasus|Pegasus}}  || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Taurus|Taurus}} || Currently in service || {{space|Orbital Sciences|Orbital Sciences}} [http://www.orbital.com/ http://www.orbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Two Launches Attempted; both failures. || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
|-
--&gt;


|}

&lt;BR\&gt;

=PROPOSED AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT=

==Australia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Ausroc|Ausroc}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Brazil==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite|VLS - Vehiculo Lancador de Satelite}} || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==China==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Long March 5|Long March 5}}  || in development || {{space|China Great Wall Industry Corporation|China Great Wall Industry Corporation}} [http://www.cgwic.com/ http://www.cgwic.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==European Union==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Skylon|Skylon}}  || Proposed || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Nova 2|Starchaser Nova 2}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||Skylon
|-
| {{space|Starchaser Thunderstar|Starchaser Thunderstar}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Vega|Vega}} || Future Development || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Iran==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Shahab-3|Shahab-3}}  || Suborbital missile  || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Shahab-4|Shahab-4}}  || Future Development Orbital || vendor needed ||
|-

&lt;!--
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-

|}


==Korea (Democratic People's Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|Taepodong-2|Taepodong-2}}  || Launch attempted || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || vendor needed ||
--&gt;
|}


==Korea (Republic of)==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|KSLV-1|KSLV-1}} || Future Development (2008?) || vendor needed ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|}


==Russia==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
|-
| {{space|Soyuz 2|Soyuz 2}}  || Future Development || vendor needed ||
|-
| {{space|Angara|Angara}}  || Future Development || {{space|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center|Khrunichev State Research and Production Center}} [http://www.khrunichev.ru/ http://www.khrunichev.ru/]&lt;BR&gt; ||
|-
|}


==United States==
{| width=75%
| width=34% | '''Booster'''
| width=33% | '''Operational Status'''
| width=33% | '''Vendor'''
|-
| colspan="3" height="0" style="border:solid #BFBFBF 1px" |
|-
| {{space|AERA Altairis|AERA Altairis}} || Future Development || {{space|Sprague Astronautics|Sprague Astronautics}} [http://www.spragueastronautics.com/ http://www.spragueastronautics.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Ares-1|Ares-1}} ({{space|Crew Transfer Vehicle|Crew Transfer Vehicle}}) || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||

|-
| {{space|Ares-5|Ares-5}}  || Future Development || [[NASA]] [http://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.nasa.gov/] ||
|-
| {{space|Black Armadillo|Black Armadillo}} || Future Development || {{space|Armadillo Aerospace|Armadillo Aerospace}} [http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/ http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Dream Chaser|Dream Chaser}}  || Future Development || {{space|SpaceDev|SpaceDev}} [http://www.spacedev.com/ http://www.spacedev.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon I|Falcon I}}  || Launch Attempted || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Falcon IX|Falcon IX}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Galaxy Express GX|Galaxy Express GX}} || Future Development || {{space|Galaxy Express|Galaxy Express}} [http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/ http://www.galaxy-express.co.jp/] ||
|-
| {{space|Interorbital Systems Neptune|Interorbital Systems Neptune}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems Neutrino|Interorbital Systems Neutrino}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Interorbital Systems|Interorbital Systems}} [http://www.interorbital.com/ http://www.interorbital.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Masten XA Series|Masten XA Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten O Series|Masten O Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Masten XL Series|Masten XL Series}} || Future Development || {{lunarp|Masten Space Systems|Masten Space Systems}} [http://www.masten-space.com/ http://www.masten-space.com/] ||
|-
| {{lunarp|New Shepard|New Shepard}} || Future Development || {{space|Blue Origin|Blue Origin}} [http://public.blueorigin.com/ http://public.blueorigin.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|Rocketplane XP|Rocketplane XP}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Rocketplane Kistler K-1|Rocketplane Kistler K-1}} || Future Development || {{space|Rocketplane Kistler|Rocketplane Kistler}} [http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/ http://www.rocketplanekistler.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Scorpius|Scorpius}} || Future Development || {{space|Scorpius Space Launch Company|Scorpius Space Launch Company}} [http://www.scorpius.com/ http://www.scorpius.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|Space Adventures Explorer|Space Adventures Explorer}} || Future Development || {{space|Space Adventures|Space Adventures}} [http://www.spaceadventures.com/ http://www.spaceadventures.com/]&lt;br&gt;{{space|Russian Federal Space Agency|Russian Federal Space Agency}} [http://www.roscosmos.ru/ http://www.roscosmos.ru/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipTwo|SpaceShipTwo}}  || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceShipThree|SpaceShipThree}} || Future Development || {{space|Scaled Composites|Scaled Composites}} [http://www.scaled.com/ http://www.scaled.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|SpaceX Dragon|SpaceX Dragon}} || Future Development || {{space|SpaceX|SpaceX}} [http://www.spacex.com/ http://www.spacex.com/] ||
|-

| {{space|TSpace Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle|T/Space Crew Transfer Vehicle}}|| Future Development || {{space|Tspace|T/Space}} [http://www.transformspace.com/ http://www.transformspace.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|X-37B|X-37B}} || Future Development || {{space|Boeing|Boeing}} [http://www.boeing.com/ http://www.boeing.com/] ||
|-
| {{space|XCOR Xerus|XCOR Xerus}} || Future Development || {{space|XCOR Aerospace|XCOR Aerospace}} [http://www.xcor.com/ http://www.xcor.com/] ||
&lt;!--
|-
| insert booster || insert status || insert vendor ||
--&gt;
|-


|}

=References=
*The canonical reference to launch vehicles is the [http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=360&amp;id=1051 International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems] by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins, published by the {{lunarp|American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics|AIAA}}; currently in its 4th edition (2004).  ([http://www.amazon.com/International-Reference-Systems-General-Publication/dp/156347591X Amazon link])

==External Links==
*[http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_launchers.html Russian Spaceweb] list of existing, historical and proposed Russian and Ukranian launch vehicles


[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]
[[Category:Boosters]]
[[Category:Launch System Vendors]]</text>
    <sha1>ab40900ccf1e0af7a8df07c767aa83c38eadc97b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>List of Lists</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>193</id>
  <revision>
    <id>919</id>
    <parentid>918</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="662" xml:space="preserve">The primary purpose of this list is to generate lists of articles that are needed by {{SITENAME}}. You can start a missing list or investigate or work on an existing list of needed articles. Please to not hesitate to add list ideas to this list or article ideas to the appropriate lists linked to from here.

...or start the article or work on improving an existing article... 

*[[List of Scientific Missions]]
*[[List of Galaxies]]
*[[List of Planets]]
*[[List of Discontinued and Cancelled Boosters]]
*[[List of Launch Systems and Vendors]]
*[[List of Comets]]
*[[List of Nebulae]]
*[[List of Constellations]]
*[[List of Stars]]


[[Category:Bootstrap Lists]]</text>
    <sha1>5dcc5bb924267dc2abadbd0a9dd1f5a133781bde</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Main Page</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>4</id>
  <revision>
    <id>923</id>
    <parentid>7</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Momentum from GTO</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>22</id>
  <revision>
    <id>933</id>
    <parentid>35</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="3061" xml:space="preserve">There are many upper stages in geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), at perigee
they have a velocity of about 10.5 kilometres per second, although this
reduces gradually over years as they slowly decay.

If a suborbital vehicle could attach a [[tether]] to one of these stages at
perigee, it could be towed most of the way into orbit.

To get into LEO requires 7 km/sec.

If the payload and the stage are equal mass, then the payload would be
accelerated by 5 km/sec and the GTO stage would be decelerated the same
amount.

Accelerating by 5 km/sec requires about 50 G acceleration for ten seconds,
which would traverse a distance of 25 kilometres (the length of tether
required).

Alternative profile would factor by ten, e.g. 500 G for one second,
traverses 2.5 kilometres (shorter length of tether but higher stress).

The tether would be on a spool with a controlled resistance (e.g. friction
brake, or dashpot, or E-M brake) to soften the initial jerk at contact,
then, pay out the tether at the right rate to control the acceleration to
the planned profile.

The practicalities of attaching a cable to an object moving at 10.5 km/sec
are daunting.  In this profile the suborbital vehicle would already need to boost itself to 2 km/sec, as the 5 km/sec is not enough to reach orbit.   Therefore the relative speed would be 8.5 km/sec (2km/sec less).
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Capture perhaps via a light weight structure made of a 3-D web of kevlar
strands (or something stronger), like a large bullet proof vest in which the
GTO stage becomes embedded.   Size, maybe a few hundreds metres across.  The
webbing could be within an inflatable sphere a few hundred metres diameter,
or alternatively shaped as a tetrahedron for simplicity of geometry.
&lt;br&gt;
The mechanics of high speed collisions are difficult to analyze.   At such
speeds, the flexibility of the strands become irrelevant, they behave more
like solid bars.    The stage would be severely damaged, one would need to
devise a configuration which would not shred the GTO stage into a zillion
fragments.  The kevlar strands would probably be stronger than the stage
material.
&lt;br&gt;
Wikipedia reports that some remarkable new developments are emerging for new
materials being used in bullet proof vests.
&lt;br&gt;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest
&lt;br&gt;
Researchers in the U.S. and separately in the Hebrew University are on their
way to create artificial spider silk that will be super strong, yet light
and flexible.
&lt;br&gt;
American company ApNano have developed a nanocomposite based on Tungsten
Disulfide able to withstand shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling
at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. During the tests, the material proved
to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially
unmarred. Under isostatic pressure tests it is stable up to at least 350
tons/cm².
&lt;br&gt;
Most upper stages are composed of Aluminum alloys (softer than steel), with
some graphite composites.
&lt;br&gt;


{{cleanup}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>70380bf84781f6391053640e5c74435086dc5ba7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>NASA B-52B</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>194</id>
  <revision>
    <id>942</id>
    <parentid>941</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>8 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1326" xml:space="preserve">== NASA-003, NASA-008 ==

Two specially-modified Boeing B-52 heavy bombers, with eight jet engines in 4 clusters of two, two of these clusters slung beneath each wing. A special hanging "cradle" was added beneath the starboard wing, between the inboard engine cluster and the fuselage. Used to launch X-15 rocketplanes (some of whose pilots flew high enough to earn their astronaut wings), to launch lifting bodies, and to launch the [[Pegasus]] orbital vehicle.  One of these aircraft, tail number NASA-003 (retired 1969), is on public display at the Pima Air &amp; Space Museum near Tucson, AZ. See: http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm [http://www.aero-web.org/museums/az/pam/52-0003.htm Boeing NB-52A 'Stratofortress' SN: 52-0003].

NASA-008 first flew in 1955 June 11 and was retired on 2004 December 17. See:  http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html [http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-005-DFRC.html B-52B "Mothership" Launch Aircraft]

The "mothership" idea continues to be used, most recently by the winner of the X-Prize, SpaceShip One, and followup craft. There is also a rumored secret Air Force space plane project, commonly referred to as "Aurora", which may also use a "mothership" configuration (if it exists).

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Boosters]]</text>
    <sha1>590fb09a9a7b40f66797cf1fd3f590bb2b78b6c7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>SCRAMJet</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>195</id>
  <revision>
    <id>956</id>
    <parentid>955</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>13 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="561" xml:space="preserve">A '''SCRAMJet''' is a type of [[ramjet]] engine in which the mixing and combustion of air within the engine is taking place at supersonic speed.  A vehicle using SCRAMJet technology would have an approximate operating range of [[Mach]] 4 to Mach 15.  Supplementary methods of propulsion would be necessary to initially accelerate the vehicle to Mach 4 and to accelerate such a vehicle into orbit (about Mach 26).
 
==See Also== 
*[[List of Propulsion Systems]] 
 
 
{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]
[[Category:Components]]
[[Category:Hardware Plans]]</text>
    <sha1>780090911d7bd6f77013c670a681183a525a2244</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Home</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>1</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1375</id>
    <parentid>1374</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:16Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Space Based Solar Power</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>2</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1077</id>
    <parentid>2</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:17Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>120 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="33051" xml:space="preserve">The Wikipedia's take on the topic is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power

= What are Power Satellites? =

The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface grid to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

If power satellites reach a high market penetration at times the power demand will go below their output.  Power in excess of current demand can be fed to synthetic fuel plants solving the liquid transport fuel problem as well.

== Methodology of This Work ==

The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis procedure.

= Power Satellites and Energy Economics =

In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

== Levelized cost of power ==

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

== Cost allocations ==

The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

== ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback time==

One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
I.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

===Transport energy===

Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

===Parts energy===

Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.

= Power Satellite Types =


== Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV==

Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

== Thermal ==

Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

= Common considerations =
==Light pressure and Mass==

Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

==Energy transmission loss==

How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

== Transport Methods Surface to LEO ==

====Falcon Heavy====

Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

====Skylon====

Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

== Transport Methods LEO to GEO ==

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

==Energy payback time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate==

I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

==Reliability==

Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

= Transport Earth to LEO =

== SpaceX ==

SpaceX may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

== Skylon ==

Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

== Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone damage (NOx) ==

NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

= LEO to GEO =

== Space Junk ==

Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

== Engines ==

== Arcjet ==

== VSMIR ==

== Power ==

== Tug Rectenna ==

Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

== Worker Transport ==

Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

== Propulsion power satellite ==

== Reaction Mass ==

== Construction Orbit ==

= CONSTRUCTION SITE =

Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

== Platform (JIG) ==

Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

== Habitat--Company Town? ==

On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

=== Limited Recycling ===

Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

== Self Power (Out to GEO) ==

In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]

== stuff to move ==


&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith</text>
    <sha1>ebe93e6f5f26b3197dfa09557b981ab39913e96f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Space Exploration 2007</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>196</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1087</id>
    <parentid>1086</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="449" xml:space="preserve">The Second International Conference and Exposition on Science, Engineering and Habitation in Space and the Second Biennial Space Elevator Workshop in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA  was held on Sunday, March 25 to Wednesday, 28 March 2007. 

It was cosponsored by the Aerospace Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.sesinstitute.org/current.html

Sponsor: [[Space Engineering and Science Institute]]

[[Category:Conferences]]</text>
    <sha1>78baa788f5c654eaca8589ee0cd6d92eb7100ddb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Stub Templates</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>197</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1089</id>
    <parentid>1088</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="43" xml:space="preserve">{{Undescribed}}

[[Category:Tag Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>773f2aa893c82682a070808f352fcaa1581fa2b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Tether</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>21</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1114</id>
    <parentid>34</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:44:18Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>24 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1718" xml:space="preserve">A '''tether''' is a thin cable that connects two portions of a spacecraft.  Tethers have been flown in space with lengths of as long at 20 km.  Much longer tethers have been proposed.

Tethers have possible applications including space propulsion, power, and artificial gravity.

Possibly the simplest and most elegant use of tethers is for space propulsion, using the method of momentum exchange by tethers.  This concept has been analyzed, among others, by [[Tethers Unlimited]]&lt;ref&gt;[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9574513 Space Tethers: Slinging Objects in Orbit?] by Nell Boyce - National Public Radio - 16 April 2007&lt;/ref&gt;.

This could be built fairly easily, possibly cheaper than building a
mass driver on the Moon.

[http://www.tethers.com/papers/CislunarAIAAPaper.pdf Cislunar tether propulsion paper] in PDF format

It has an advantage over mass driver in that it can be used to soft land on
the Moon as well as depart from the Moon.  If the energy imparted by the cargo is balanced, the tether would require little if any energy input and minimal propellant usage.

==See Also==
[[Momentum from GTO]]


==External Links== 

&lt;references/&gt;

[[Star Technology and Research, Inc.]]

Lunar Anchored Satellite [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/als/lunar.pdf ]

Space Elevators [http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html http://www.star-tech-inc.com/spaceelevator.html]

[[Tethers Unlimited]] [http://www.tethers.com http://www.tethers.com]

[[Tether Applications]] [http://www.tetherapplications.com http://www.tetherapplications.com]

[http://spacetethers.com http://spacetethers.com]


{{Launch Stub}}
[[Category:Transportation]]</text>
    <sha1>6725b5b18a2282a0a3a1d12d958b35aae69d8b96</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>File:Apollo 09 David Scott podczas lotu Apollo 9 GPN-2000-001100.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>175</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1115</id>
    <parentid>623</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:56:39Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded [[File:Apollo 09 David Scott podczas lotu Apollo 9 GPN-2000-001100.jpg]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="162" xml:space="preserve">[[David Scott]] during the [[Apollo 9]] mission

Public domain NASA image

[[Category:Public Domain Images]]
[[Category:Photos]]
[[Category:Public Domain Photos]]</text>
    <sha1>2993d0f3e54b60002ae75c36affec9b976b18761</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>File:Bootstrap1.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>176</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1116</id>
    <parentid>625</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T14:58:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded [[File:Bootstrap1.png]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="80" xml:space="preserve">{{PD-self}}

Pulling up by a literal bootstrap

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]</text>
    <sha1>fabd64b1dcceb343f34b1eb1f40c5953f2b1dd7f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1119</id>
    <parentid>1116</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T22:09:44Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded a new version of [[File:Bootstrap1.png]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="80" xml:space="preserve">{{PD-self}}

Pulling up by a literal bootstrap

[[Category:Public Domain Icons]]</text>
    <sha1>fabd64b1dcceb343f34b1eb1f40c5953f2b1dd7f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>File:Exoplatz.png</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>179</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1117</id>
    <parentid>635</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T22:06:31Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded [[File:Exoplatz.png]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="93" xml:space="preserve">This is the temporary logo for Exoplatz, the general space wiki.

[[Category:Template icons]]</text>
    <sha1>c50dd840e5c1c2b8f34d432571be13c2f80b1f1c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>File:Mearns.jpg</title>
  <ns>6</ns>
  <id>180</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1118</id>
    <parentid>637</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T22:07:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv uploaded [[File:Mearns.jpg]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="86" xml:space="preserve">Graphic that comes from a source that says it is ok to use provided it is acknowledged</text>
    <sha1>b26be7d807be74118513bd3e7a3490bfdb10ee9b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>User:Strangelv</title>
  <ns>2</ns>
  <id>174</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1121</id>
    <parentid>621</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T22:16:09Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Quick and dirty update</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="532" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!--
{| style="align: right; float: right; border: 0px" cellspacing = 0
|{{User Past Director}}
|-
|{{User 3 Digit}}
|-
|{{User Sysop}}
|-
|{{User Server Admin}}
|-
|} --&gt;

'''James Gholston''' is a Moon Society director, former secretary, and has been involved with the Artemis and Moon Societies since 1999. He first served on the board after being appointed to fill an unexpired term on the Board of Directors in 2006, serving until the end of the 2007-2009 term.

He presently serves in a large number of mostly political roles.</text>
    <sha1>7a23c0e25e8c7702c015686131d0601aa2a69247</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Black</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>198</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1125</id>
    <parentid>1124</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="284" xml:space="preserve">&lt;includeonly&gt;&lt;onlyinclude&gt;#000000&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;/includeonly&gt;

{| {{Nicetable}}
| &lt;DIV style="background:{{ {{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }}; height:3em; width:3em"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;
| &lt;DIV style="height:3m; width:5em; text-align:center"&gt;'''{{ROOTPAGENAME}}'''&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}

[[Category:Color Templates]]</text>
    <sha1>c5afc802f3c4b8908551eb2d6473cfa74ea8d7bf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Brainstorm</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>199</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1128</id>
    <parentid>1127</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="874" xml:space="preserve">{|
|&lt;DIV&gt;
{| style="border 1px solid #070707; font-size:8pt; padding:4pt; line-height:1.25em; {{RBX}}"
| [[File:Brainstorm Article Graphic.svg|80px]]
| This article is a [[List of Brainstorms|'''Brainstorm''']]&lt;BR/&gt;
It's not quite a stub -- it has less pretense of organization than that right now.&lt;BR/&gt;
It does not need to be particularly tidy until someone is ready to turn this into a formal article.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;When this enters the realm of being a formal article, please remove this tag.&lt;/SMALL&gt;
|- 
| colspan="2" | 
'''You can help this wiki by adding your ideas on this subject to this page.''' &lt;BR/&gt;
'''Any idea about this -- even an incomplete and messily presented one -- helps this page as a starting point.'''&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Thank you.'''
|}&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Brainstorms]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>2e1ae0f2dd15874b191f4ab044d23059c41b139f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Colorblock</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>200</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1133</id>
    <parentid>1132</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="452" xml:space="preserve">&lt;onlyinclude&gt;&lt;DIV style="background:{{{color|#FF7FBF}}}; height:{{{height|2em}}}; width:{{{width|2em}}}; display:inline; display:inline-block"&gt; &lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;

==Examples==
&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{288C}} }}


&lt;nowiki&gt;{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}&lt;/nowiki&gt;
{{Colorblock | color={{640C}} | height=1.5em | width=3em}}

[[Category:Color Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>42f86da3253559bd1ccea4c17436d3ed75569dcb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:ConceptScenario</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>201</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1135</id>
    <parentid>1134</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="661" xml:space="preserve">{| width=85% align=center cellspacing=0 style="border: 1px solid #bbbbbb; background-color: #f6f6f6; margin-bottom: 0px;"
 |&lt;div style="float: left; border: solid #bbb 0px; margin: 0px;"&gt;
   {| width=100% cellspacing="0" style="background: #f6f6f6"
    | style="width: 32px; height: 32px; background: #f6f6f6; text-align: center; font-size: 10pt; color: #fff" | [[Image:Bulb.png|32px]]
    | style="text-align: center;" |'''This article is a presentation of a concept scenario.'''&lt;br /&gt;&lt;small&gt;Please see the relevant discussion on the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}#{{{1|}}}|talk page]]&lt;/small&gt;
    |}
  &lt;/div&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Concept Scenarios]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d65edc8678be407438ebc28c73d388f3ef84c452</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Fair Use Image</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>202</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1137</id>
    <parentid>1136</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:Fair use]]</text>
    <sha1>7f8d53ba82e864f76c83cae32738f37d730a9425</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Fair use</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>90</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1139</id>
    <parentid>251</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:45Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="363" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF" | This image is only available for use in terms of [http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html Fair Use]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Fair Use Images]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>52150768a4bdaf3a88a58b65c510fea36bec4184</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Featured article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>203</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1154</id>
    <parentid>1153</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>14 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="948" xml:space="preserve">===&lt;!--[[Image:red_ring.png|15px|left]]--&gt;Featured article: [[JSC-1]]===
[[Image:EIC050-2.GIF|160px|left]] JSC-1, a lunar soil simulant, was developed and characterized under the auspices of the NASA Johnson Space Center. This simulant was produced in large quantities to satisfy the requirements of a variety of scientific and engineering investigations. JSC-1 is derived from volcanic ash of basaltic composition, which has been ground, sized, and placed into storage. The simulant's chemical composition, mineralogy, particle size distribution, specific gravity, angle of internal friction, and cohesion have been characterized and fall within the ranges of lunar mare soil samples. ...([[JSC-1|read more]])
&lt;DIV style="text-align:right"&gt;
&lt;SMALL&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;[[Featured articles|See all featured articles]]&lt;/STRONG&gt; | [[Talk:Featured_articles|Nominate!]]&lt;/SMALL&gt;
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:templates]][[Category:Main Page Maintenance]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>57c00d3ffb86da84ba40274914e0cebc50106e4e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Fork2sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>91</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1156</id>
    <parentid>254</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="342" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid black;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#007F7F;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Scientifiction.org.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>709ea17830819087686e5d8078022613a6f7dda8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Fork2space</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>92</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1158</id>
    <parentid>257</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="334" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #7F7F7F;padding:2pt;margin:2px;line-height:1.25em;background:#000000;font-size:8pt;color:#FFFFFF"&gt;
'''It is requested that a fork of this article be installed to Exoplatz.'''
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;

&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:Interwiki Fork Requests]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f76363264f4ea12034093c8aa01445c7b48eaa1a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Lunarp</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>123</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1161</id>
    <parentid>389</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="317" xml:space="preserve">[[lunarp:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:LunarpediaLogoH512 43.png|14px]]&lt;noinclude&gt;

----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{lunarp|Lava tubes|lavatubes}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>07e996db42854a0520f63900581394d4a2d68163</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:MMM</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>124</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1163</id>
    <parentid>393</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="726" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;"&gt;
&lt;DIV style="width: 45px; background: #FFFFFF; float: left; text-align: center; color: #BF001F;"&gt; &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#BFBFBF"&gt;'''MMM'''&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV style="margin-left: 60px;"&gt;This article is based on content from Moon Miners' Manifesto&lt;BR/&gt;
[[Image:MMM.gif|180px]]&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;includeonly&gt;[[Category:Moon Miners' Manifesto based articles]]&lt;/includeonly&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;

This template is for articles derived from [[Moon Miners' Manifesto]].

[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d2952cef88792eb54d67b8dde5c3b58c9c5039d9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:Nicetable</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>204</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1166</id>
    <parentid>1165</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="487" xml:space="preserve">A workaround for lack of wikitable

&lt;DIV style="border:solid #5F5F5F 1px; background:#EFEFDF; padding:5px 5px 5px 5px; text-align:left;margin-top:5px;"&gt;

&lt;onlyinclude&gt;border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="background:#F7F7F7; border:1px #A0A0A0 solid; border-collapse:collapse;"&lt;/onlyinclude&gt;

&lt;/DIV&gt;

To use: 
'''&lt;TT&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;nowiki&gt;
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}
&lt;/nowiki&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;/TT&gt;'''

Result:
{| {{nicetable}}
|-
|A
|B
|C
|-
|1
|2
|3
|-
|a
|b
|c
|}</text>
    <sha1>b912dcec250924a94d2e2273fff24628b7c75dd7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:No Endorsements</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>136</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1168</id>
    <parentid>450</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">{| style="border:solid #BFBF00 1px;margin:1px;padding:1px;background:#FFFFBF"
|&lt;DIV style="border:1px solid #BFBF00;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#EFEFEF;font-size:8pt;"&gt;
'''Reminder:'''
Content on {{SITENAME}} is community provided.  Neither {{SITENAME}} nor its sponsoring organizations make any endorsements of any organization, businesses or related claims made on {{SITENAME}}.
&lt;/DIV&gt;
|}&lt;BR/&gt;
&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fbf47935b25f7c3ab8baa3c0d5246c2d93d6ccab</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:One Sided Article</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>205</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1173</id>
    <parentid>1172</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="465" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This article may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:POV]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0f13c5c804c3256b39c34431ec60e761bff370bc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408144412|639">
  <title>Template:One Sided Section</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>206</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1177</id>
    <parentid>1176</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="465" xml:space="preserve">{| align=center style="max-width: 28em; border:solid #808080 1px; background: #FFF0D9;"
|-
| [[Image:Unbalanced scales.png|none|40px]]
|&lt;center&gt;'''This section may be presenting a one-sided viewpoint to the exclusion or minimization of alternate views.&lt;br&gt;&lt;small&gt;You can help Lunarpedia by &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} restructuring or rephrasing]&lt;/span&gt; it'''.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/center&gt;
|}
&lt;includeonly&gt;
[[Category:POV]]
&lt;/includeonly&gt;</text>
    <sha1>65ab0207973311cecea6c4c767730a578eb35d07</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:PersPosArticle</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>207</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1179</id>
    <parentid>1178</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">This article reflects the personal position of</text>
    <sha1>27935b41c448dcba87e7ec2eff5d9d454ee8bb11</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:PersPosSection</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>208</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1181</id>
    <parentid>1180</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="46" xml:space="preserve">This section reflects the personal position of</text>
    <sha1>439a612c6ff4c08797486016853eb6577c09735e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>209</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1186</id>
    <parentid>1185</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1949" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE = "border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0px;margin:0px;font-family:'Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten;filter:progid:dximagetransform.microsoft.emboss"&gt;&lt;!-- emboss is MSIE only, unfortunately, which also means I can't test it from here --&gt;
{| STYLE = "margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px;background:#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "height:8px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| STYLE = "width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; .
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| STYLE = "width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; / &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ~
| 
| 
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S&amp;nbsp;A&amp;nbsp;N&amp;nbsp;D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;E&amp;nbsp;G&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;L&amp;nbsp;I&amp;nbsp;T&amp;nbsp;H &amp;nbsp; B&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.       
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;,
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(    
|  
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
| &amp;nbsp;_
|---- STYLE = "padding:0;margin:0"
| BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fef6520658cef0d8e3bad828590174cb52e7e1b6</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1362</id>
    <parentid>1186</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:28:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Fixing by removing MSIE-specific formatting that MediaWiki now strips out</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1771" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:solid #3F3F1F 12px;padding:0;margin:0;font-family:'Purisa','Lucidia Handwriting','Irezumi','Comic Sans','Comic Sans MS',Papyrus,Script,Handwritten;"&gt;
{| style="margin:0px;color:#7F7F6F;height:8px;padding:0px;background:#CFCFC7" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" ||
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| style="height:8px;padding:0px" colspan="100%" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" |
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0;width:100%"
| style="width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" BGCOLOR = "#7F7F6F" | X
| style="width:18px; height:18px;padding:0px" | 
| style="width:100%;padding:0px;width:100%" | &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; .
| style="width:18px;padding:0px" | 
| style="width:18px;padding:0px" | 
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0"
| bgcolor="#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; / &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ~
| 
| 
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0"
| bgcolor="#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &lt;BIG&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;S&amp;nbsp;A&amp;nbsp;N&amp;nbsp;D &amp;nbsp; A N D &amp;nbsp; R&amp;nbsp;E&amp;nbsp;G&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;L&amp;nbsp;I&amp;nbsp;T&amp;nbsp;H &amp;nbsp; B&amp;nbsp;O&amp;nbsp;X&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.       
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0"
| bgcolor="#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;,
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(    
|  
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0"
| bgcolor="#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| This is the sandbox.  Please use this page to tinker with any formatting questions or pure experimentation you may have.  Go ahead.  Make a really big mess here.
| 
| &amp;nbsp;_
|---- style="padding:0;margin:0"
| bgcolor="#7F7F6F" STYLE = "width:18px;|
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-
| 
| &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;.
|----
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;noinclude&gt;[[Category:Tag Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ce15fe16f043383d9ade69a4e73ad439717cb6ed</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Script Test</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>154</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1188</id>
    <parentid>528</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="border:solid black 1px;margin:1px;width:225px"&gt;
{| 
| style="padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:#FFDFBF;" | This article is a script test and is not appropriate for editing.  Please discuss what should be different in the &lt;span class="plainlinks"&gt;[{{fullurl:{{TALKPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} talk page]&lt;/span&gt;.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Tag Templates]]
[[Category:Test Templates]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fce308332aac7aefe379e3799203b320cca73382</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:ServerProbs</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>210</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1190</id>
    <parentid>1189</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="359" xml:space="preserve">{| width=85% align=center cellspacing=3 style="border: 1px solid #C0C090; background-color: #F8EABA; margin-bottom: 3px;"
|-
|align="center"|
'''We are currently suffering from some intermittent outages. For more information see [http://www.dreamhoststatus.com/ DreamHost Status] and keep in mind that, in some cases, a "Resolved" tag might not mean fixed.
|}</text>
    <sha1>e327771b9709dd30c8ce08abcc618502f117abdb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Sf</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>157</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1192</id>
    <parentid>541</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="337" xml:space="preserve">[[sf:{{{1|'''ARTICLE NAME MISSING'''}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]][[Image:Exoproject Rocket Inverted 14px.png]]&lt;noinclude&gt;
----
usage:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|article name|display name}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

for example:

{&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;}

{{sf|Lunar Timelines|hypothetical futures}}

[[Category:Interwiki Templates]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1cd2379ab44ba71964f23894570ac10801f8858c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Succession Box</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>211</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1195</id>
    <parentid>1194</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="372" xml:space="preserve">&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
| width="30%" |Before:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{before}}}'''
| width="40%" style="text-align: center;" |'''{{{what}}}&lt;BR/&gt;{{{years}}}'''
| width="30%" |After:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{after}}}'''
|}
&lt;BR style="clear: both;" /&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d0df46c902a1be1b0f55b49569b10ba681a573a8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User 1 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>212</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1203</id>
    <parentid>1202</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_1.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''ONE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8c0386b0160109312e3db4ffbdaa01917259b2ba</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User 2 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>213</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1208</id>
    <parentid>1207</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="462" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_2.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''TWO DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8bf28d112002265c1332a2f1a4b12b92bad371b3</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User 3 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>214</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1214</id>
    <parentid>1213</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="477" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_3.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''THREE DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>6c2dafe779dd300f36e0cb571810992ee664a50b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User 4 Digit</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>215</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1217</id>
    <parentid>1216</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="476" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43_4.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Has a '''FOUR DIGIT''' membership number with the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>dc2d086250ccedf1ce5fa35e4acc24d69dbd0497</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User 4 Eyes</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>216</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1219</id>
    <parentid>1218</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="400" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:4_eyes.gif]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Really has 4 eyes.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>fa6736bc1e87434273c7648e9da7720f330fa5fa</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User ASI Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>217</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1225</id>
    <parentid>1224</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="461" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A current or former director of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|ASI.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9c2f2b9fc9cb21cf399088efd56a9ae589e6005a</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User ASI Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>218</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1231</id>
    <parentid>1230</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="458" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Asi-logo-43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | A past or serving officer of the '''[[Artemis Society International]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|ASI.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>f77e289d9ad43e3204d9b6b09d703bc29d4687db</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>219</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1233</id>
    <parentid>1232</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:47Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="48" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Moonsociety Director]]</text>
    <sha1>92f20fab2c1f86dc3fc5ea9387a4a8923640c258</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Exd Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>220</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1236</id>
    <parentid>1235</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="450" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>be2b56af1a6d5443d3c577a93c142f37720b6ef8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Exd Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>221</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1239</id>
    <parentid>1238</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="435" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Exodictionary.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is an Exodictionary Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Exodictionary.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>257610b18c87c4c53e9c066e1b002bd02874e14d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>222</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1241</id>
    <parentid>1240</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="51" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Moonsociety List Master]]</text>
    <sha1>c55afdefc46e6c1cb9ffe850e80f1e25059bdc14</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>223</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1247</id>
    <parentid>1246</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="425" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Lunarpedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d5a3fe48301642407ff6dbdb00f5a67e4ff70f98</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Lunarp Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>224</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1251</id>
    <parentid>1250</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="423" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:LogoG920 fix01 155 8bit.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Lunarpedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d1e5633d4f4ff51a600cb3904e9a7b006fe266c9</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User MarsS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>225</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1254</id>
    <parentid>1253</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="495" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marssociety-weblogo_43x43.JPG‎ ]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[marsp:Mars Society|Mars Society&lt;sup&gt;marsp&lt;/sup&gt;]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a576bb850bc13ca3bf54e86082e96ca9402eb5d1</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Marsp Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>226</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1257</id>
    <parentid>1256</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="437" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>889dbf03b26ba92d1b67491d8026360663a4871c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Marsp Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>227</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1260</id>
    <parentid>1259</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="422" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Marspedia.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Marspedia Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Marspedia.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>73ca549571cf2ec0589fba99d4a8e43da7a156f7</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>228</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1265</id>
    <parentid>1264</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="456" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a member in good standing of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>0963ad5ddac6c5d4569fa14e6eee7778c6909f6e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>229</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1270</id>
    <parentid>1269</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="466" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Moonsociety.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d41ebaffbeffb2ddaea710873636695babe2c5ae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Moonsociety List Master</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>230</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1275</id>
    <parentid>1274</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="468" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is current list-master for the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes|Moonsociety.org]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>3c7cf0bfdb8f5c22b793d47da563f7cd7189e52b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>231</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1281</id>
    <parentid>1280</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>5 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="475" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>1c3756f6d09dce22264fb1b69c8fd4c90248e1a2</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User NSS Member</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>232</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1304</id>
    <parentid>1303</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>22 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">eldardronze
&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A member in good standing of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>95481399c043494d6ea497cbdcb2ac95b2c8840f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User NSS Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>233</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1309</id>
    <parentid>1308</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>4 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="484" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A serving or former officer of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d382d15ce1107352812f9e15c2b5b40eb9338703</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Non-domestic</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>234</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1312</id>
    <parentid>1311</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="402" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#FFFFFF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#f0f059;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Brew.png]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user prefers non-domestic brew.
|}&lt;/div&gt;


&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>a61a2c3d2734b4c2e6e9a4b9e2a8a1dfdd202025</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>235</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1316</id>
    <parentid>1315</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="447" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a serving officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>62036638eec69581636ffd0fd52aea02f3dcfb3c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Past Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>236</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1320</id>
    <parentid>1319</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>3 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="445" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past director of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>21a8fbf17a59582a5e76a323afb12f3484bf76d4</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Past NSS Director</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>237</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1322</id>
    <parentid>1321</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:49Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="474" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #1446A0 2px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:236px;background:#EFEFEF;height:43px;"
| style="width:41px;height:41px;background:#FFFFFF;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;color:white" | [[Image:Nss-logo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;color:#CD1423;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;background:white" | A former director of the '''[[National Space Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>d240c8c9411207f7ad8649bf17fc61b24033ca23</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Past Officer</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>238</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1332</id>
    <parentid>1331</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="444" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Moonsociety-weblogo_43x43.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a past officer of the '''[[Moon Society]]'''.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>c98eb40755a1e02eed0f0da6e3a9d63fb6988600</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>239</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1334</id>
    <parentid>1333</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="47" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Lunarp Server Admin]]</text>
    <sha1>8cf4622c1c6f6a0c4fd587ed8f67c54da8c0de25</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Sf Server Admin</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>240</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1337</id>
    <parentid>1336</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="431" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Server Administrator.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>748f398d966085c19e875bd5306efc75dcaee9cb</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Sf Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>241</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1340</id>
    <parentid>1339</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="416" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | [[Image:Scientifiction.png|43px]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a Scientifiction Sysop.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>9899bca677fd5edae9f4b0a12ebfea7e2b7f1c16</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Sims2</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>242</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1342</id>
    <parentid>1341</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="424" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #000000 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#000000;text-align:center;font-size:20pt;color:#BF7F00" | [[Image:Sims2.jpg]]
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | Plays [http://www.thesims2.com The Sims 2].
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;
[[Category:Lunarpedia userboxes]]
&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>8e4cdf79854c2e221f0c890db373c7479147352e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Sysop</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>243</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1344</id>
    <parentid>1343</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="40" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Lunarp Sysop]]</text>
    <sha1>cf49fa7ae0d49aa998bb5b19a0ddd9857292453b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User USMC</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>244</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1347</id>
    <parentid>1346</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>2 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="386" xml:space="preserve">&lt;div style="float:left;border:solid #BFBFBF 1px;margin:1px;"&gt;
{| cellspacing="0" style="width:238px;background:#EFEFEF;height:45px;"
| style="width:43px;height:43px;background:#7F7F7F;text-align:center;font-size:14pt;" | '''USMC'''
| style="font-size:8pt;padding:4pt;line-height:1.25em;" | This user is a former Marine.
|}&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>5b336576a4e3dfe507a3e02086543a08ba06ca9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:User Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>245</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1357</id>
    <parentid>1356</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>9 revisions imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="494" xml:space="preserve">&lt;!-- pure html userbox, take 1.1 --&gt;
&lt;table cellspacing=0 width=238 style="max-width: 238px; width: 238px; background: white; padding: 0pt; border: 1px green solid"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #07BF07; text-align: center; color: black;"&gt;&lt;big&gt;
'''V'''
&lt;/big&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td style="padding: 4pt; white-space: normal; line-height: 1.25em; width: 193px;"&gt;&lt;small&gt;
This user is a '''Vegetarian'''
&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;

&lt;noinclude&gt;[[category:lunarpedia userboxes]]&lt;/noinclude&gt;</text>
    <sha1>ad4a3ea4808444f51011ed5e4e22e2ad40eb3126</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Userbox Vegetarian</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>246</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1359</id>
    <parentid>1358</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="38" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Template:User Vegetarian]]</text>
    <sha1>838071f04af8794d927d719c975c53d5f9f29c38</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Template:Year box</title>
  <ns>10</ns>
  <id>247</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1361</id>
    <parentid>1360</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:03:51Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>1 revision imported</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="389" xml:space="preserve">&lt;br style="clear: both;" /&gt;
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; margin:0 auto;"
|- style="text-align: center;"
| width="30%" |Previous Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{before}}}'''
| width="40%" style="text-align: center;" |'''The Year Of &lt;BR/&gt;{{{year}}}'''
| width="30%" |Following Year:&lt;br /&gt;'''{{{after}}}'''
|}
&lt;br style="clear: both;" /&gt;</text>
    <sha1>18811c54532a4551d72eb01abae8c9dca028b19c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Spacepedia:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>4</ns>
  <id>248</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1363</id>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:34:07Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reinstalling the sandbox</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="938" xml:space="preserve">{{Sandbox}}
&lt;!-- - - - INSERT MESS BELOW THIS LINE  - - DELETE WHAT'S ALREADY HERE AS DESIRED OR NECESSARY - - - --&gt;

==Sing a Song==
''Mare&lt;ref&gt;A mare is a female equinine&lt;/ref&gt; Anguis Park&lt;ref&gt;Park is a transmission setting&lt;/ref&gt; is silent in the dark{{Fact|date=March 2007}}''.&lt;BR/&gt;
''All those cosmic&lt;ref&gt;Cosmic refers to something of universal significance&lt;/ref&gt; rays are pouring down''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Someone dropped the&lt;ref&gt;This article doesn't have a gender.  You can improve Lunarpedia by replacing it with Die, Das, or Der.&lt;/ref&gt; cake in [[Regolith]]''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Do not think that I'll forget it''&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Cause&lt;ref&gt;a cause is a motive for action, such as Antidisestablishmentarianism&lt;/ref&gt; it took so long to get it''&lt;BR/&gt;
''And they'll never ship&lt;ref&gt;A vessel, such as an aircraft carrier or oil tanker&lt;/ref&gt; to here from Earth again!''&lt;BR/&gt;
''OH&lt;ref&gt;Hydroxide is a diatomic ion&lt;/ref&gt; NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!&lt;BR/&gt;''

==References==
&lt;references/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>950a318b3a10951a062df0a63f8536abab8d74f8</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1364</id>
    <parentid>1363</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:35:27Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="938" xml:space="preserve">{{Sandbox}}
&lt;!-- - - - INSERT MESS BELOW THIS LINE  - - DELETE WHAT'S ALREADY HERE AS DESIRED OR NECESSARY - - - --&gt;

==Sing a Song==
''Mare&lt;ref&gt;A mare is a female equinine&lt;/ref&gt; Anguis Park&lt;ref&gt;Park is a transmission setting&lt;/ref&gt; is silent in the dark{{Fact|date=March 2007}}''.&lt;BR/&gt;
''All those cosmic&lt;ref&gt;Cosmic refers to something of universal significance&lt;/ref&gt; rays are pouring down''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Someone dropped the&lt;ref&gt;This article doesn't have a gender.  You can improve Spacepedia by replacing it with Die, Das, or Der.&lt;/ref&gt; cake in [[Regolith]]''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Do not think that I'll forget it''&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Cause&lt;ref&gt;a cause is a motive for action, such as Antidisestablishmentarianism&lt;/ref&gt; it took so long to get it''&lt;BR/&gt;
''And they'll never ship&lt;ref&gt;A vessel, such as an aircraft carrier or oil tanker&lt;/ref&gt; to here from Earth again!''&lt;BR/&gt;
''OH&lt;ref&gt;Hydroxide is a diatomic ion&lt;/ref&gt; NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!&lt;BR/&gt;''

==References==
&lt;references/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>742466097f6f67c2d00fc2765ecc49f548576d5f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1365</id>
    <parentid>1364</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:36:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Strangelv moved page [[Exoplatz:Sandbox]] to [[Spacepedia:Sandbox]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="938" xml:space="preserve">{{Sandbox}}
&lt;!-- - - - INSERT MESS BELOW THIS LINE  - - DELETE WHAT'S ALREADY HERE AS DESIRED OR NECESSARY - - - --&gt;

==Sing a Song==
''Mare&lt;ref&gt;A mare is a female equinine&lt;/ref&gt; Anguis Park&lt;ref&gt;Park is a transmission setting&lt;/ref&gt; is silent in the dark{{Fact|date=March 2007}}''.&lt;BR/&gt;
''All those cosmic&lt;ref&gt;Cosmic refers to something of universal significance&lt;/ref&gt; rays are pouring down''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Someone dropped the&lt;ref&gt;This article doesn't have a gender.  You can improve Spacepedia by replacing it with Die, Das, or Der.&lt;/ref&gt; cake in [[Regolith]]''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Do not think that I'll forget it''&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Cause&lt;ref&gt;a cause is a motive for action, such as Antidisestablishmentarianism&lt;/ref&gt; it took so long to get it''&lt;BR/&gt;
''And they'll never ship&lt;ref&gt;A vessel, such as an aircraft carrier or oil tanker&lt;/ref&gt; to here from Earth again!''&lt;BR/&gt;
''OH&lt;ref&gt;Hydroxide is a diatomic ion&lt;/ref&gt; NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!&lt;BR/&gt;''

==References==
&lt;references/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>742466097f6f67c2d00fc2765ecc49f548576d5f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1367</id>
    <parentid>1365</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T15:49:54Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1004" xml:space="preserve">{{Sandbox}}
&lt;!-- - - - INSERT MESS BELOW THIS LINE  - - DELETE WHAT'S ALREADY HERE AS DESIRED OR NECESSARY - - - --&gt;

[[lunarp:Human Powered Flight]]

[[Lunarp:Human Powered Flight]]

==Sing a Song==
''Mare&lt;ref&gt;A mare is a female equinine&lt;/ref&gt; Anguis Park&lt;ref&gt;Park is a transmission setting&lt;/ref&gt; is silent in the dark{{Fact|date=March 2007}}''.&lt;BR/&gt;
''All those cosmic&lt;ref&gt;Cosmic refers to something of universal significance&lt;/ref&gt; rays are pouring down''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Someone dropped the&lt;ref&gt;This article doesn't have a gender.  You can improve Spacepedia by replacing it with Die, Das, or Der.&lt;/ref&gt; cake in [[Regolith]]''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Do not think that I'll forget it''&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Cause&lt;ref&gt;a cause is a motive for action, such as Antidisestablishmentarianism&lt;/ref&gt; it took so long to get it''&lt;BR/&gt;
''And they'll never ship&lt;ref&gt;A vessel, such as an aircraft carrier or oil tanker&lt;/ref&gt; to here from Earth again!''&lt;BR/&gt;
''OH&lt;ref&gt;Hydroxide is a diatomic ion&lt;/ref&gt; NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!&lt;BR/&gt;''

==References==
&lt;references/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>07e657d37dd28eff65549db3d7e1d4123d8b7783</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1368</id>
    <parentid>1367</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T16:46:22Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Interwiki testing</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="1072" xml:space="preserve">{{Sandbox}}
&lt;!-- - - - INSERT MESS BELOW THIS LINE  - - DELETE WHAT'S ALREADY HERE AS DESIRED OR NECESSARY - - - --&gt;

*[[lunarp:Human Powered Flight]]
*[[Lunarp:Human Powered Flight]]
*[[Exd:Titania]]
*[[Marsp:Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator]]


==Sing a Song==
''Mare&lt;ref&gt;A mare is a female equinine&lt;/ref&gt; Anguis Park&lt;ref&gt;Park is a transmission setting&lt;/ref&gt; is silent in the dark{{Fact|date=March 2007}}''.&lt;BR/&gt;
''All those cosmic&lt;ref&gt;Cosmic refers to something of universal significance&lt;/ref&gt; rays are pouring down''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Someone dropped the&lt;ref&gt;This article doesn't have a gender.  You can improve Spacepedia by replacing it with Die, Das, or Der.&lt;/ref&gt; cake in [[Regolith]]''&lt;BR/&gt;
''Do not think that I'll forget it''&lt;BR/&gt;
'''Cause&lt;ref&gt;a cause is a motive for action, such as Antidisestablishmentarianism&lt;/ref&gt; it took so long to get it''&lt;BR/&gt;
''And they'll never ship&lt;ref&gt;A vessel, such as an aircraft carrier or oil tanker&lt;/ref&gt; to here from Earth again!''&lt;BR/&gt;
''OH&lt;ref&gt;Hydroxide is a diatomic ion&lt;/ref&gt; NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!&lt;BR/&gt;''

==References==
&lt;references/&gt;</text>
    <sha1>e4220ff06049a59ab02129d64d746160efdd8133</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190408230346|1179">
  <title>Exoplatz:Sandbox</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>249</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1366</id>
    <timestamp>2019-04-08T23:36:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv moved page [[Exoplatz:Sandbox]] to [[Spacepedia:Sandbox]]</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="32" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Spacepedia:Sandbox]]</text>
    <sha1>67051ca03b07408b4cdd0eac33a9c1ab9a93418c</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Main Page</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>4</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1369</id>
    <parentid>923</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:07:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reinstating existing main page over redirect</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11120" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   

&lt;!--
Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
--&gt;

Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>59299c1e77780062ffd3a7017e41957a4b77ac8d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1370</id>
    <parentid>1369</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:10:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reinstating redirect; doing this another way</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Home</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>1</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1376</id>
    <parentid>1375</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:07:50Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reinstating existing main page over redirect</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11120" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   

&lt;!--
Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
--&gt;

Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>59299c1e77780062ffd3a7017e41957a4b77ac8d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1377</id>
    <parentid>1376</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:10:01Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Exoplatz.org&gt;Strangelv</username>
      <id>0</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reinstating redirect; doing this another way</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1378</id>
    <parentid>1377</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:13:41Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>7 revisions imported: Reimporting existing home page to new location</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="18" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Home]]</text>
    <sha1>3c9846fc91826543c49e08653ad8ca1614c26b9e</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1379</id>
    <parentid>1378</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T17:14:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Existing home page now back into place</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="11120" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Exoplatz]]
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;br&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses version 1.9 of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.9.3 while 1.11 was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Exoplatz and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We added the footnote capability to Exoplatz, so that is the same.   

&lt;!--
Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
--&gt;

Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)</text>
    <sha1>59299c1e77780062ffd3a7017e41957a4b77ac8d</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1419</id>
    <parentid>1379</parentid>
    <timestamp>2020-07-02T17:11:26Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="10113" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' [[namespace]] are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  Please post a request to import the desired article on an active sysop's [[User_talk:Strangelv|talk page]].
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] --&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to the General Space Wiki!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

This Wiki is to provide a location for general space articles and content for the same project that brought you [http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia], [http://marspedia.org Marspedia] and [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary].  Construction is underway and you can help!

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

== How to layout your pages ==

* You can download a very useful one page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/3/30/Wiki-refcard.pdf Wiki Reference Card] as a PDF.

* Or a less comprehensive, but much nicer looking, single page [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Cheatsheet-en.pdf Wikipedia Cheatsheet], also as a PDF.

Both these files are best saved to your hard drive and also printed. Right click and "Save Link As" to do that. Or, if you have the plugins installed you can just click and view in your browser. But please don't forget to come back here afterwards :-)

== Signing your comments ==

When you add comments to User_talk pages, please sign using '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- ~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''', this automatically adds your signature and a time and date stamp in UTC like so:
&lt;br&gt;-- [[User:MikeD|MikeD]] 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous users (those not logged in) should also sign with some sort of ID, like for instance '''''&lt;nowiki&gt;&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs ~~~~~&lt;/nowiki&gt;''''' which would result in something like the following:
&lt;br&gt;-- JoeBloggs 15:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


&lt;!--
== Categories of interest: ==
* [[:Category:Agriculture]] -- Agriculture on the moon and elsewhere
* [[:Category:Apollo]] -- The Apollo Program
* [[:Category:Business]] -- How to set up a space business or an entire network of businesses
* [[:Category:Chemistry]] -- Chemical reactions and composition of lunar resources
* [[:Category:Components]] -- What you can expect to find to be able to put something together with, and what may be in the works
* [[:Category:Help]] -- Help
* [[:Category:Hardware Plans]] -- From how to build a cheap space telescope you can stick on a shared Dnepr launch, to O'Neil Colonies
* [[:Category:Life Support]] -- Life Support master category, sub categories should go in here. Most of these sub categories will eventually be listed as main categories also.
* [[:Category:Locations]] -- [[Mare Crisium]], [[Mare Anguis]], [[Tranquility Base]], etc. Note that location and sector articles are planned to be added in bulk by an automated [[Lunarpedia:Autostub1|script]] that is in development. Any contributions to these topics will be replaced by an automatically generated article stub.
* [[:Category:Missions]] -- This category covers historical missions, from the early Ranger and Lunar missions, through Apollo, and covering recent missions such as SMART.
* [[:Category:Mission Plans]] -- Possible future missions from potentially affordable ones to multibillion dollar exodi 
* [[:Category:Organizations]] -- Organizations which support lunar or space colonization.
* [[:Category:People]] -- Who is whom, was whom, or could be and why
* [[:Category:Physics]] -- The equations and other requirements
* [[:Category:Selenology]] -- Lunar geology, composition, features of interest
* [[:Category:Transportation]] -- Transportation to, from, in, on, or over Luna. (Orbital, suborbital, surface or subsurface)
* [[:Category:Urban Planning]] -- Urban planning on Luna, with special regard to closed environments. Some subcategories will also fit under other primary categories such as Life Support and Transportation
* [[:Category:Vendors]] -- Companies you can or may eventually buy components from
--&gt;
&lt;!--
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''You Can Help!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

*Find an identified needed article with a [[Lockheed Martin|red link]], click '''&lt;u&gt;[[Special:Wantedpages|here]]&lt;/u&gt;''' for a list of missing but linked to articles, or create your article by typing in the topic name in the URL (such as ''ht&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;tp://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;articlename&lt;/FONT&gt;''.)

*Refine an article [[:Category:Stubs|stub]] into something more complete.

*Or simply tidy up an article in [[:Category:Cleanup|this]] category.

*[[Peter Kokh]]'s [[Lunarpedia:Outline draft|outline]] is another place to find ideas.

*An offsite guide to Wiki formatting can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Here].

*Our [[List of Lists]] contains links to lists of needed articles and needed lists of such articles.

=Differences versus Wikipedia=

There are several differences between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia in both policy and Wiki software capability.
--&gt;

==Policies==

&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|'''NASA Images:''' NASA still images, audio files and video generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products '''(including Web pages)''' that are not NASA sponsored.&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
===Original Work is Allowed===
We are more open to material types than Wikipedia, and less interested in deleting material.  Specifically, Wikipedia enforces a rule that all entries must NOT be "original work".     That rule does not apply for Lunarpedia, we are very happy for you to post original work, provided it is not copyright.  Therefore there is not so much duplication between Lunarpedia and Wikipedia as you might expect.  For example, the Lunarpedia page on [[lunarp:Solar Power Satellites|Solar Power Satellites&lt;FONT style="font-weight:bold;vertical-align:super;font-size:72%"&gt;lunarp&lt;/FONT&gt;]] contains interesting material which under Wikipedia rules would be deleted because it is "original work".

Note: Once "original work" has been published on Lunarpedia, then anybody could put on Wikipedia a link to the Lunarpedia article, and that might be OK for Wikipedia as it would no longer be original work, and references are usually accepted over there.  For those cases where you want to reference it elsewhere, we could arrange for it to become read-only protected.

===No Need to be Notable===

Wikipedia enforces a requirement that all articles about people or organizations must demonstrate why the subject is "notable".   There is no such requirement on Lunarpedia, although there is a general expectation that it should somehow be related to Lunar Development.

===No Need to be Neutral===

You can advocate positions, but expect to be challenged.  Conversely, do not just delete material you do not agree with, but feel free to add a rebuttal.

If you do advocate positions, please do so in a manner that makes it obvious that it is your personal position and not that of Spacepedia as a whole. You can do this using the tags &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosArticle}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; or &lt;nowiki&gt;'''''{{PersPosSection}} ~~~'''''&lt;/nowiki&gt; which would display something like so:

'''''{{PersPosArticle}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''&lt;br&gt;
'''''{{PersPosSection}} [[User:MikeD|MikeD]]'''''

===Commercial Links are OK===

It is perfectly fine to highlight products or services, including both your own and those of other persons or companies.   Just make sure it is relevant.

==Software Capabilities==

Lunarpedia uses Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. 

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is supported between Spacepedia and it's sister sites ExoDictionary, Lunarpedia and Marspedia.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.</text>
    <sha1>bf677d70de30ab623f92c035f203fe7969d40230</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Space Based Solar Power</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>2</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1380</id>
    <parentid>1077</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T19:38:35Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Limited reformatting pass</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="33065" xml:space="preserve">

==What are Power Satellites?==
The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA

They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface grid to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

If power satellites reach a high market penetration at times the power demand will go below their output.  Power in excess of current demand can be fed to synthetic fuel plants solving the liquid transport fuel problem as well.

===Methodology of This Work===
The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis procedure.


==Power Satellites and Energy Economics==
In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg|320px]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

===Levelized Cost of Power===

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

===Cost Allocations===
The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

===ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback Time===
One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
i.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

====Transport Energy====
Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

====Parts Energy====
Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.


==Power Satellite Types==
===Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV===
Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

===Thermal===
Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

==Common Considerations==
===Light Pressure and Mass===
Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

===Energy Transmission Loss===
How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Transport Methods Surface to LEO==
===Falcon Heavy===
Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

===Skylon===
Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

===Transport Methods LEO to GEO===
The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

===Energy Payback Time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate===
I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

===Reliability===
Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

==Transport Earth to LEO==
===SpaceX===
[[SpaceX]] may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

===Skylon===
Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

====Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone Damage (NOx)====
NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

==LEO to GEO==

===Space Junk===
Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

===Engines===

====Arcjet====

====VSMIR====

===Power===

===Tug Rectenna===
Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

===Worker Transport===
Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

===Propulsion Power Satellite===

===Reaction Mass===

===Construction Orbit===

==Construction Site==
Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

===Platform (JIG)===
Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

===Habitat--Company Town?===
On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

====Limited Recycling====
Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

===Self Power (Out to GEO)===
In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.


&lt;!-- == stuff to move ==
&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith
--&gt;

==External Links==
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power Wikipedia's take on the topic]

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>0518151b38b5e5ec2e1bd4fc60f38fa6e46cf52f</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1381</id>
    <parentid>1380</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-09T19:51:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Reworking start of article a little.</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="33404" xml:space="preserve">'''Space Based Solar Power''' is the concept of moving the collection of energy from [[Sol]] to Earth orbit in order to increase collection efficiency, eliminate weather, time-of-day, and seasonal outages, and reduce needed land usage.  Energy collectable from orbit is a major factor in the first level of the [[Kardashev Scale]].

==What are Power Satellites?==
&lt;!-- The history is covered in the Wikipedia article above.  The 1968 work by Peter Glaser is briefly mentioned in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEkZkINrJaA
--&gt;
They are a way to collect solar power out in space, usually GEO where the sun shines 99% of the time.  Solar power on the ground has the problems of intermittency from clouds, night and the sun being low in the sky. Typically, ground solar in good locations averages about 20% of its peak rating. Power satellites are subject to short eclipses (up to 70 minutes) near the equinoxes around midnight.  Because demand is low, the interruptions can be tolerated.  With deep market penetration, the microwave beams can be crossed if the demand exceeds the capacity of the surface grid to redistribute power east to west or west to east.

They potentially scale to more than ten times the current energy needs of the human race.  Started soon and pushed hard, they could end the build up of CO2 in the atmosphere and even reverse it.

If power satellites reach a high market penetration at times the power demand will go below their output.  Power in excess of current demand can be fed to synthetic fuel plants solving the liquid transport fuel problem as well.

===Methodology of This Work===
The specifics in this study are less important than the analysis methodology.  Important concepts include levelized cost of power, specific mass in terms of kg/kW, lift cost, ERoEI, and payback times.  The attempt here will be to analyze specific examples but the details of choices such as PV vs thermal are less important than the analysis procedure.


==Power Satellites and Energy Economics==
In the absence of other forces (such as legal requirements to buy renewable energy) power satellites compete in the energy market.  Of all energy forms, electrical energy is the ultimate standard commodity.  When a customer plugs in a toaster, there is no way to tell what source the energy came from.  At the end of the month, they pay the bill at the rate set by the power company under the oversight of a utility commission.  One level up, the power companies are hemmed in by regulations that they buy (or make) the lowest cost electricity, with exceptions in some places that they have to purchase certain amounts of renewable energy.  Wind and (ground) solar are both intermittent, requiring other sources or expensive storage to provide reliable power.  The capital cost of intermittently run backup power either bankrupts the utilities or results in very high electrical rates.  This is the current situation: the higher the fraction of renewable, the higher the consumer cost of electricity.

[[File:Mearns.jpg|320px]]

The reason for the higher cost for systems that includes a lot of renewable power is not hard to understand.  Wind and solar are intermittent.  If steady, reliable power is desired then alternate sources of power are required.  The capital cost of these backup sources must be included in the systemwide average cost of power in addition to the capital and maintenance cost of the wind or solar.

Space based solar power is renewable but not intermittent.  That should make it easier to sell power from space at a premium.  However, governmental energy policy changes unpredictably over time.  An alternative would be a "design to cost" effort where the target cost of power is low enough to get a large market share without government intervention.  Competing on cost is the way discount suppliers of many commodities obtained a substantial market share.  (Examples, Southwest Airlines, GEICO, Charles Schwab.)

===Levelized Cost of Power===

The formula for the levelized cost to generate electricity is here:  [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source]

This spreadsheet [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wDvn369EudkYGsPK3jNt4FmBFpNFtt0ZwDZl_lt_SNM/edit#gid=1481425448] assumes $1,600,000 per MW ($1600/kW) as the initial cost and 10% per year of the parts cost for maintenance.  Power satellites supply base load.  In the spreadsheet, it is assumed to be ~91% of the time.  It may be higher.

The discount rate used in the spreadsheet is 6.8%, same as the US government uses for other sources.  The accounting period is 20 years, and no salvage value is assumed.

The ratio between the $1600/kW cost and the cost that comes out of the formula (~2 cents per kWh) is approximately 80,000 to one.  Electric power cost is proportional to the cost of a power satellite (or any power source that has no fuel cost and low maintenance) in this ratio for this discount rate and years of service.

The UK government has determined that 3.5% discount is proper for projects of this kind.  Using 3.5%, the electric cost comes out at just over 1.5 cents per kWh and ~100,000 to one.  Extending the accounting period to 30 years at 3.5% brings the cost of power down to 1.24 cents per kWh and a cost of power to cost of investment ratio to ~130,000 to one.  It is a live spreadsheet; try your own numbers.  A ratio of 80,000 to one is conservative.

To take market share from coal will require the cost to be less than 4 cents per kWh for electricity from coal.  Three cents per kWh allows a capital cost of $2400/kW.  That, or less, is the "design to cost" target.

===Cost Allocations===
The current model has the $2400 target cost (from levelized cost above) split out as follows:

*$200/kW for the rectanna ($1 B for 5 GW), 

*$900/kW for the cost of parts and minor labor in space and 

*$1300/kW (6.5 kg/kW[[https://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue18/thermalpower.html]] and $200/kg) for the cost of transport to GEO.  (add pointer to sustech 2014 paper)

These numbers are targets which future work will firm up.  If they go too high, something (like the cost charged for the electric power) will have to be adjusted.  Of course, if they go too high, the entire idea needs to be reconsidered.

===ERoEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and Energy Payback Time===
One of the metrics used to evaluate energy projects is energy
return on energy invested.  This is expressed as a ratio, and for
shallow oil wells decades ago was typically 100 to one or higher.
i.e., number of barrels of oil needed to drill an oil well divided
into the number of barrels it produced.  An alternate way more applicable to
renewable sources is the energy payback time.  It's typically about
two years for PV or wind.

High ERoEI and short payback times usually accompany low cost.

Most of the energy embedded in a power satellite comes from the transport fuel.

====Transport Energy====
Combustion of hydrogen is 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg plus the energy needed to liquefy the hydrogen.  Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" (you may need to add Berstad)
and go down to page 20.  There they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg to liquefy hydorgen.  A large industrial plant might
do a little better by warming the LNG before steam reforming with hydrogen to start the cooling.  Ignoring that possible small improvement, the energy cost of LH2 is about 46 kWh/kg.
It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy,
but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and (if we ship it as LNG) it
only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of natural gas to liquefy it.  I.e.,
measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.
The CO2 released by steam reforming of natural gas is about 2.5 times the hydrogen produced.

The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric
propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On
average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16
tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  I.e., 73% of the payload in LEO gets to GEO.  At launch the average Skylon has 59
plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload
62 tons/11.84 tons or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not
included since it is outside the Earth system.  (The capital cost of the
propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

For a power satellite specific mass of 6.5 kg/kW, a kW of power satellite (i.e., 6.5 kg) would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to put it in GEO.
Using 46 kWh/kg for the energy content of LH2, that's around 1566 kWh of energy per kW of power satellite.

====Parts Energy====
Without a detailed list of the parts, materials and mass in a power
satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into making the parts.
Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much
will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts
would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on
time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three-month energy repayment time.  There are no other renewable
proposals that are even close.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one, as good as early shallow oil wells.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in
the design phase, but it is good enough to justify investigation in detail.

In his book on power satellites, John Mankins gives a payback time of 8 weeks.  John uses the energy from physics, about 12 kWh/kg from the surface to GEO) (IIRC, it's actually 14.75 kW/kg)and doubles it twice for his estimate.


==Power Satellite Types==
===Photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrated PV===
Most designs for power satellites since the 1970s have been PV.  PV has advantages, long experience powering communication satellites being important.  However, PV suffers from relatively low efficiency (20%) and degradation from radiation.  There are proposals by Robert Forward and Robert Holt on draining the van Allen belt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiVolt]; however, just the presence of a substantial number of power satellites in GEO is expected to greatly mitigate the radiation from particles trapped in the Earth's magnetic field.  (The particles are stopped by running into a power satellite.  There are only about 3 kg of protons trapped in the belts.)  

There are PV cells that range up to 40% efficient, but they require concentrated light and cooling.  The work on thermal power satellites makes CPV possibly attractive, though there are problems with the limited supply of gallium which is used to fabricated the multi-junction cells.

===Thermal===
Thermal (heat engines) power satellites are expected to eventually range up to 60% efficient, similar to combined cycle plants on earth. This means they need about 1/3 of the light interception area of ordinary PV, which reduces station keeping from light pressure.  However, they also need radiator area that is about twice the sunlight interception area, (Bejan, 1997, pg 495, ref Bejan, A. Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.) Counting both sides of the radiator makes the exposed area for thermal and photovoltaic power satellites about the same.

==Common Considerations==
===Light Pressure and Mass===
Light pressure is about 9 N/km^2

The original studies done in the late 1970s came up with a mass of ~10 kg/kW.  More recent realistic studies have averaged around 7 kg/kW.  A few studies have proposed designs under one tenth of a kg/kW.  Very light designs require a lot of station keeping against light pressure where designs in excess of 5 kg/kW can average the light pressure over a year.  Because a substantial fraction of the construction cost is for transport to GEO, the mass of a power satellite is as important a number as the lift cost to GEO.  This analysis will use 6.5 kg/kW.  The number can be adjusted in the spreadsheets.

===Energy Transmission Loss===
How efficient is the transmission of the energy with the microwave beam?

For economic analysis, 50%.  The loss chain might be a little better with technical improvements, but not much.  It means you generate two kW in space for one kW on the rectenna bus.  That's been assumed in all the analysis here.

==Transport Methods Surface to LEO==
===Falcon Heavy===
Consider the projected Falcon Heavy, 53,000 kg to LEO, 121,400kg of
RP-1.  That's about 2.3 kg of fuel for every kg lifted to LEO (here I assume that the entire mass in LEO is either reaction mass for the trip up or can be converted to power satellite parts--this may not be reasonable).  RP-1
is 42 MJ/kg, so the energy expended to LEO is about 96.2 MJ/kg or 26.7
kWh/kg.  You also have to lift the reaction mass for the LEO to GEO
leg so the fuel cost needs to be increased by around 20% giving 33.4
kWh/kg.  If the reaction mass is hydrogen, it's energy content is not
zero, hydrogen is close to 50 kWh/kg to make it and another 20 kWh/kg
to make it into a liquid.  So to move a kg from LEO to GEO would take
1/4 kg of LH2 at 70 kWh/kg or 17.5 kW/kg, for a total of ~51 kWh/kg.
At 10 kg/kWe (on the ground) 510 kWh will be required to move a kW of power sat to GEO.
At 100% on time, that's about 23 days to repay the energy.  Unless I made an error, John's number is close enough.  If only half of a Falcon Heavy payload becomes power satellite parts, John's estimate is very close.

===Skylon===
Much of the analysis been done using 50 kWh/kg as a ballpark number for hydrogen.  It's good enough for rough calculations and it what it takes to make hydrogen if you are making it with electric power.

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol.  Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg.  That's quite a bit less.  The rough analysis have also been using 20 kWh/kg to liquify the hydrogen.  That's way off.  If you Google for "A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen" Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg.  We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to cool the hydrogen.  That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg.  It's hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it.  I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference.  Still, this Wiki article needs to go into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

===Transport Methods LEO to GEO===
The current LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit.  On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass.  At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2.  That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg/kg of payload.

(Why hydrogen and not an inert gas?  For a given amount of energy you can get considerably more exhaust velocity out of hydrogen.)

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system.  (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Using my supported but perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place.  Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that's around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it's not easy to say how much energy goes into the parts.  Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg.  But not very much will be aluminum.  If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a  total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That's a three month energy repayment time.  I don't know of any other proposal that is even close.  And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost.  Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years.  This just barely meets Gail's requirements. For a first approximation, the embedded energy in the parts and the energy required to make LOX are so small in comparison to RP1 or LH2 that they can be ignored.

It's surprising that even with a lower kg/kW number the energy payback time is longer for the Skylon.

===Energy Payback Time, EROEI and Maximum Growth Rate===
I recently ran an energy payback time for power satellites constructed using Falcon Heavy. It came in at around 8 weeks.

The current computation of LEO to GEO hydrogen consumption (using electric propulsion) is 4000 tons to get 15,000 tons to high orbit. On average, that makes a 15 ton Skylon payload 11.84 tons cargo and 3.16 tons of hydrogen reaction mass. At launch the average Skylon has 59 plus 3 or 62 tons of LH2. That makes the hydrogen per ton of payload 62/11.84 or 5.25 kg of hydrogen per kg of payload.

The solar energy used to power the LEO to GEO transport is not included since it is outside the system. (The capital cost of the propulsion power satellite is included in the financial models.)

Combustion of hydrogen is 286 kJ/mol. Mole is 2.016 gm, so 496 moles in a kg, 143 MJ/kg or 39.4 kWh/kg. If you Google for “A Future Energy Chain Based on Liquefied Hydrogen” Berstad and go down to page 20, they cite a number of ~6.5 kWh/kg. We might do a little better because we can use warming the LNG to partly cool the hydrogen. That makes the energy content of the LH2 about 46 kWh/kg. It’s hard to say exactly where you should measure the input energy, but the process to make hydrogen from natural gas is efficient, and it only uses about 1.7% of the energy in a kg of NG to liquify it. I.e., measuring at the well head will not make a great deal of difference. Still, we need to dig into the thermodynamics of steam reforming.

Using s perhaps optimistic number of 6.5 kg/kW, an installed kW would use a little over 34 kg of LH2 to get it in place. Using 46 kWh/kg for the LH2, that’s around 1566 kWh per installed kW.

Without a detailed list of the parts materials and mass in a power satellite, it’s not easy to say how exactly much energy goes into the parts. Aluminum has the most embedded energy at 15 kWh/kg. But not very much will be aluminum. If we estimate 10 kWh/kg, the energy in the parts would be ~650 kWh, for a total of 2216 kWh per kW of capacity.

When the power satellite is turned on, it takes 92 days (at 100% on time) to repay the energy used to build it and move it to GEO.

That’s a three month energy repayment time. We know of no other energy proposal that is even close. And the energy from a power satellite not intermittent.

If the power satellites last 30 years, you get an ERoEI of 120 to one.

This is subject to adjustment as we settle on more accurate numbers in the design phase, but it should be reasonably close.

ERoEI is an interesting metric, but the more important figure is the cost. Target cost is 3 cents a kWh falling to 2 cents within a few years. This just barely meets Gail’s requirements.

By the criteria given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_cannibalism and here https://web.archive.org/web/20090817071517/http://www.climate2008.net/?a1=pap&amp;cat=1&amp;e=61 a power satellite growth rate of lower than 360% per year would result in lowering GHG emissions.

===Reliability===
Electric power needs to be reliable.  First, the
power satellite size is only 5 GW.  The target number is 3000 for 15
TW.  There would be spares sending power to low priority loads that
could be switched in less than a second to replace a higher priority failed one.  Plus
we would still have the grid to distribute electricity from the
remaining powered rectennas, and for a long time, there would be other generation in the mix.

None the less, there are ways we could lose the whole fleet of them in
an instant if they were not designed to deal with it.  In the year 774 or 775
the Earth seems to have been hit with either a unprecedented solar flare or a fairly close gamma ray burst.
The latter are typically a few seconds, the former might take a few hours.  In any case, it put a serious kink in the carbon
14 for the next growing season.  Such an event would take out the
controls for any power satellite that did not have enough shielding
around the control computers.  The shielding needed against these 1000
year events is considerably more than the worst solar flares observed to date.

Unlikely as they are, GRB or intense high energy solar flares are a concern that requires mitigation and recovery strategies
such as watch dog timers and hardened reboot memory.  Radiation
resistance is an argument in favor of rotating machines rather than PV.

A solar flare can be seen coming and outside workers would probably have time to reach shelter.  A GRB would be over before the workers had a chance to move.  Neither are serious problems for people behind shielding good enough to stop cosmic rays.

==Transport Earth to LEO==
===SpaceX===
[[SpaceX]] may not get the transport cost down low enough.  It has to be to
be SSTO or possibly TSTO runway operations.  

SpaceX _will_ eventually get the cost to GEO down by a full order of
magnitude, a remarkable achievement.  Unfortunately this won't do it
for power from space, it takes _two_ orders of magnitude reduction.
Elon Musk knows this.  It might be why he is so down on power satellites.

Note Oct 15,2016.

Musk was recently talking about a rocket with a cost of putting cargo into a Mars trajectory for $143/kg.  That's remarkable and is low enough for power satellites to make economic sense.

===Skylon===
Until Reaction Engines demonstrated their high performance precooler, there were no realistic SSTO proposals out there.

[[www.reactionengines.co.uk/space_skylon.html]]

====Skylon Doesn't Cause Much Ozone Damage (NOx)====
NOAA worked out that up to a million Skylon flights per year there is little damage to the ozone.  There is no point in solving the carbon and energy problem with power satellites if the cost is a billion cases of skin cancer.

The NOAA people put a lot of effort into modeling the problem, hundreds of hours of supercomputer time on the models, writing a paper and getting it through peer review.  Highly appreciated.

The paper is available online at

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000399/full

Click on the PDF symbol next to the journal title.

==LEO to GEO==

===Space Junk===
Back in the late 70s, Boeing proposed building power satellite in LEO and then self powering to GEO (using ion engines or arcjets).  They even did some nice artwork.  But even in those days there was enough space to make this a very risky move and it was abandoned.  HKH redid the math in recent years using the density of space junk given in the Wikipedia article.  The result was that a power satellite would be hit almost 40 times while self powering to GEO.  Almost all the hits are below 2000 km altitude.

Building power satellites in LEO would work, it's just they could not be moved to where they are useful unless the plan includes cleaning up the space junk first.

===Engines===

====Arcjet====

====VSMIR====

===Power===

===Tug Rectenna===
Increasing the frequency to 25 GHz and reducing the distance to half allows reducing the tug rectenna to 500 m.

This has not been optimized, nor have the tracking details worked out.

===Worker Transport===
Getting workers out to 12,000 km takes either a fast transport to keep the radiation exposure from the inner van Allen belt down or sending them up inside cargo containers.  If they go up with power satellite parts around them for shielding, the trip is about 25 days.  The return trip is shorter, around 5 days, but unless a lot of shielding is taken

===Propulsion Power Satellite===

===Reaction Mass===

===Construction Orbit===

==Construction Site==
Tentatively we have selected 10,400 km, less than one third of the way to GEO.  This is in a six hour orbit orbit.  The choice is based on this altitude being the low radiation zone between the inner and outer van Allen belts.  The orbit is subject to tradeoff/optimization studies which have not been done yet.

===Platform (JIG)===
Even more tentative, we have envisioned a kind of "dry dock" for power satellites.  Big frame of beams to move cargo from the stacks to the work sites where the power satellites are constructed.  We also project a rotating habitat with the spin axis pointing solar north/south and a concentrating reflector to bring light inside through a window.

===Habitat--Company Town?===
On the roughest of analogies dating back to Liberty ship construction in WW II, it might take 400 construction workers for the 10 per year pilot construction plant.  This includes families.  The shielding on the habitat will need to be ~six tons per square meter to reduce the cosmic radiation to the level seen on Earth.

The consequence for a 50 m habitat is 60,000 tons of shielding, about $9 B in lift cost at $150/kg.  

It has to be a spinning habitat.  One thing learned from the ISS is that neat as zero g is, human do not do well health wise in long term zero g.  The spin rate for one g at the equator is 6 RPM.  Do we spin the shielding or just the habitat?  In either case, there is a considerable amount of rotational kinetic energy in the habitat.  Whatever is used for a bearing must be proof against lockup.

There is a reason for families.  We can't expect construction workers to live like monks or nuns.  Taking them to and from 10,400 km (6 hour orbit) is either slow or very expensive in reaction mass and power.  It is relatively easy to ship the workers and families up.  They are shielded by containers of parts for the 25 days it takes to transit up.  But there are no parts coming back down so shielding for returning workers would have to be carried at great cost.  Alternately, they could go up in the habitat if it was constructed in LEO.

About the interaction of radiation, workers and transport . . . we might be able to build power satellites entirely using
robots directed from the ground or by AIs.  We don't have such robots/AIs yet, but if the development time is short and the cost less than $9 B, that may be the way to go.  (Teleoperated robots are closer and a 6 hour orbit does not induce as much speed of light delay as GEO.)  I would be OK with that, though saddened by the loss of human
experience.  Assuming we don't have robots building power satellites,
or at least they need help from people, then we have to have people in
space.  For social and economy of scale reasons
fewer than about 200 may not make sense.  If the ISS is any indicator,
one quarter of them will be working on maintenance to keep the habitat
liveable.

A power satellite project makes a lot of money but can it afford 200
workers in space?  Perhaps the least complicated analysis is to take
the income stream from 10-12 power satellites per year.  That seems to
be the minimum were transport economies of scale kick in.  11 power
satellites at $11 billion each is $121 B.  A thousand people would be
building $121 M per person, 500 would be building $242 M each.  A pay
rate of a million per person per year would make the labor charges on
the product under half a percent.

We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them
$200/kg for steak.  Just kidding!

After feeding the workers, the "used" food becomes part of a power
satellite so the effective cost to feed them is zero.  If there is
nothing else to use it for, each power satellite needs a substantial
"space anchor."  A "space anchor" is just a multi ton mass (anything
will do) on the end of a long string.  It is connected to the
transmitter disk edges by a bridal and winches.  It eliminates using
reaction mass for pointing the power satellite.  (Gravity gradient
stabilization.)

So we can pay the workers and feed them.  Next problem is getting them
out to the construction site.  If we use 10,400 km (in the radiation
minimum between the van Allen belts) then the time for the reference
beamed energy transportation system is about 25 days up and about 5
days back.  In the Apollo program,
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm, the astronauts skirted
around the belts and went fast so they didn't spend time in them.  For
power satellites we have to bull right through the hottest part of the
Van Allen belt and slowly too due to the orbital mechanics of spiral
orbits.

However, we have something on the trip up the Apollo astronauts didn't
have, tens of thousands of tons of power satellite parts which can be
used for shielding.  The scale of the cargo stacks is more or less set
by beamed energy microwave optics used to power the stack out to the
construction site.  If made of Skylon sized containers, a cargo stack
has 11 layers of 91 containers per layer.  If the modules for human
transport are buried a few layers down and in the center of the stack,
it's hard to imagine the relatively low radiation of the worst part of
the belt giving them much exposure (though it should be calculated).

An alternative would be to build the habitat in LEO and send it up with the workers inside.  Depending on the propulsion power available, this could take a couple of months.

The exposure on the way down is 1/5th the time, but with no cargo to
shield them, the radiation exposure would be much larger, perhaps
lethal.

My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
would be expected to stay at least ten years.  That means that (unless
you plan on using monks) we have to send up families.  That means
children, and that means controlling the radiation in the construction
habitat to no worse than the level at Denver and spinning the habitat
to one g. 

====Limited Recycling====
Most food for the workers can be shipped up.  It is essentially free since after people eat it, it can all be recycled into parts of a power satellite.  Not so with fresh food that cannot survive a month shipping.  Salad greens need to be grown in the habitat.  This does not look like a hard problem and may eliminate some of the atmosphere contaminate problems that require burners in submarines.

===Self Power (Out to GEO)===
In terms of reaction matter consumption, it makes no difference if the power satellite self powers part of the way out or not.


&lt;!-- == stuff to move ==
&gt;&gt; We get the wages back at the company store where we charge them $200/kg
&gt;&gt; for steak.  Just kidding!
&gt;
&gt; Not really kidding, though. The burdened cost of labor in orbit is indeed
&gt; exorbitant, however you do the accounts. You should see the rent on a 30 m^2
&gt; studio per month! Orbital habitat is indeed the epitome of the company town.
&gt; The 19th c. mining barons would salivate over the opportunities to exploit
&gt; labor in this environment. I doubt modern financiers are all that much
&gt; different.

I don't know how to solve this problem.  I would think the
organization that was running the power satellite construction project
would want to keep their workers happy.  However, don't assume the
workers are western.

&gt;&gt; My solution to this problem is to send workers up one way.  I.e., they
&gt;&gt; would be expected to stay at least ten years.
&gt;
&gt; This isn't medically viable unless you have an artificial gravity
&gt; environment.

Agree.  And radiation shielding to Earth surface exposure as well, at
least for the inside.  The problem comes from the interaction of
orbital mechanics, the slow trip up (needed to keep the reaction mass
cost down) and the lack of shielding during the trip back down to LEO.
The radiation exposure for the trip back may be reduced by draining
the Van Allen belt, but there does not seem to be a low cost way of
moving people to the construction site outside the cargo stacks.

&gt; The marginal cost tradeoff is between transportation expense
&gt; and habitat capital and operating expense.

That's sort of true.  But when it takes 25 days to get up and 5 to get
back, the working come would be cut by 1/3 if you had the workers on a
2 month schedule.  Plus coming back they would probably accumulate a
lifetime radiation limit, if it didn't kill them.

&gt; In terms of cost estimating, the easy was to deal with all this is to assume
&gt; a fractional cost burden on powersat maintenance and then design habitat to
&gt; that cost. It's not going to be possible to know a whole lot more at the
&gt; current stage of maturity.

I don't understand maintenance.  This is only about construction.  I
have not yet considered where we base the human maintenance workers.
Any thoughts?  In any case, shielding is a big problem no matter where
you base people in space.

Keith
--&gt;

==External Links==
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power Wikipedia's take on the topic]

[[Category:Earth Orbit]]</text>
    <sha1>ff86bee6fc68b6301d4db5222b427bc37d69aabf</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>International Space Development Conference</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>8</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1382</id>
    <parentid>18</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-10T21:54:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Stub tags; categorization; minor addition</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="336" xml:space="preserve">The Annual gathering of the [[National Space Society]], usually held each May over Memorial Day weekend. Most often the venue is in the USA, although in previous years they have been in Toronto, Canada and Sydney, Australia.

Originally hosted by the [[L5 Society]] in the early 1980s.

{{Event Stub}}{{Subminimal}}

[[Category:Events]]</text>
    <sha1>d578f84ebcb8b9def868271fc64f6765b15fadae</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Dictionary:Home</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>251</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1411</id>
    <parentid>1410</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:00:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>27 revisions imported: Migrating main page</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7631" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''NEW ACCOUNT CREATION IS TEMPORARILY DISABLED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;We hope to get things back in order sometime soon.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Anonymous contributions and existing account logins remain permitted.'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>a52f66bd6eb49f8997b2b5b2f4f48a56a89f0d59</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1412</id>
    <parentid>1411</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:01:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <minor/>
    <comment>Strangelv moved page [[Dictionary:Main Page]] to [[Dictionary:Home]]: Compliance with new naming convention</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7631" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''NEW ACCOUNT CREATION IS TEMPORARILY DISABLED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;We hope to get things back in order sometime soon.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Anonymous contributions and existing account logins remain permitted.'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>a52f66bd6eb49f8997b2b5b2f4f48a56a89f0d59</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1414</id>
    <parentid>1412</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:05:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Changing text on ugly notice box</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7567" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''MIGRATION IS BEING PLANNED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Content is presently still located at [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary.org].'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Exodictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>010d44baa8102bfce836875a87e80a46147fe348</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1415</id>
    <parentid>1414</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:07:12Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="7575" xml:space="preserve">&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #000000; background:#BFBF3F; padding:0.225em"&gt;&lt;DIV style="border:3px solid #7F1717; background:#BFBF3F"&gt;&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;BIG&gt;'''MIGRATION IS BEING PLANNED.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Content is presently still located at [http://exodictionary.org Exodictionary.org].'''&lt;/BIG&gt;&lt;/CENTER&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;!-- {{ServerProbs}}
&lt;BR/&gt; --&gt;
&lt;DIV STYLE="border:solid #7F0707 1px;margin:5px;width:40%;float:right"&gt;
{|
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|&lt;BIG&gt;&lt;FONT COLOR="#7F0000"&gt;'''NOTICE:''' All articles in the '''main''' namespace are released to the '''Public Domain''' and may be used for any purpose without entangling restrictions.  '''DO NOT''' add any content to these pages that you do not wish to release to the public domain and/or lack the authority to release to the public domain!&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/BIG&gt;
&lt;!--
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Other namespaces for less open terms may be pending.
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles controlled by the '''GNU FDL''' should be imported with full revision histories to the GFDL: namespace.  For example, the [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] article from Wikipedia would need to be implemented as [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[GFDL:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;] here.  A [[Lunarpedia:Wikipedia_Import|tutorial]] is now available.
|-
| STYLE = "padding:4pt;background:#EFEFFF"|Articles meant to require attribution to Lunarpedia.org under the terms of Creative Commons must be placed in the CC_Lunar: namespace (for example, [&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;[CC Lunar:Crater chain]&lt;B&gt;&lt;/B&gt;]
--&gt;
|}
&lt;/DIV&gt;
=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''Welcome to Exodictionary!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=

Exodictionary is a dictionary of space terms that anyone can edit.  It is also a supplement for '''[http://exoplatz.org Exoplatz]''', '''[http://lunarpedia.org Lunarpedia]''', '''[http://marspedia.org Marspedia]''', and '''[http://scientifiction.org Scientifiction.org]'''  You can help!

Note that this is a dictionary.  Full articles and original research belong in Lunarpedia, Marspedia, Scientifiction.org, or the general space wiki Exoplatz.

&lt;!--

=&lt;FONT COLOR="#3F3F3F"&gt;'''New Users Start Here!'''&lt;/FONT&gt;=  

* '''[http://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Index-url Lunarpedia QuickStart]''' -- If you haven't got a clue what you want to look for.

*Click [http://www.lunarpedia.org/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&amp;type=signup here] to create your account -- or else donate your content anonymously.

* You can click on your user name and create a page to tell us about yourself.

* If you have questions or comments about any page then click on the "discussion" tab and type in the edit box.    Make sure to sign the text with a row of four tilda (~) characters

--&gt;

{| style="background:#003F3F"
|- style="background:#000000;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |Subdivided
|style="background:#0F0F0F;color:#BFBFBF;font-weight:bold" |All
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:A|A]]
|[[:Category:A (all)|AA-AZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:B|B]]
|[[:Category:B (all)|BA-BZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:C|C]]
|[[:Category:C (all)|CA-CZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:D|D]]
|[[:Category:D (all)|DA-DZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:E|E]]
|[[:Category:E (all)|EA-EZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:F|F]]
|[[:Category:F (all)|FA-FZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:G|G]]
|[[:Category:G (all)|GA-GZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:H|H]]
|[[:Category:H (all)|HA-HZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:I|I]]
|[[:Category:I (all)|IA-IZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:J|J]]
|[[:Category:J (all)|JA-JZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:K|K]]
|[[:Category:K (all)|KA-KZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:L|L]]
|[[:Category:L (all)|LA-LZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:M|M]]
|[[:Category:M (all)|MA-MZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:N|N]]
|[[:Category:N (all)|NA-NZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:O|O]]
|[[:Category:O (all)|OA-OZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:P|P]]
|[[:Category:P (all)|PA-PZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Q|Q]]
|[[:Category:Q (all)|QA-QZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:R|R]]
|[[:Category:R (all)|RA-RZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:S|S]]
|[[:Category:S (all)|SA-SZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:T|T]]
|[[:Category:T (all)|TA-TZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:U|U]]
|[[:Category:U (all)|UA-UZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:V|V]]
|[[:Category:V (all)|VA-VZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:W|W]]
|[[:Category:W (all)|WA-WZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:X|X]]
|[[:Category:X (all)|XA-XZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Y|Y]]
|[[:Category:Y (all)|YA-YZ]]
|- style="background:#BFBFBF;color:#FFFFFF;font-weight:bold"
|[[:Category:Z|Z]]
|[[:Category:Z (all)|ZA-ZZ]]
|}


&lt;!--
==Software Capabilities==
Exodictionary uses the latest stable version of Mediawiki, so in many respects it is very similar to Wikipedia. At the time of writing this, we were running version 1.11.1 while 1.13alpha was the unreleased development version.

===Interwiki===
Interwiki is now supported between Marspedia and it's sister sites Lunarpedia and ExoDictionary.&lt;br&gt;
To use interwiki you just use tags like&lt;br&gt;
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Sandbox]], [[lunarp:Sandbox]] and [[marsp:Sandbox]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

Other examples would be:
&lt;nowiki&gt;[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]]&lt;/nowiki&gt;. These would take you to&lt;br&gt;
[[exd:Azimuth]], [[lunarp:Carbon economy]] and [[marsp:Mars Express]] respectively.&lt;br&gt;

The interwiki prefixes on the other sites are identical.

===Installed Extensions we admit to===

*CategoryTree
*Cite
*ImageMap
*MathStatFunctions
*ParserFunctions
*SpamBlacklist - Should we admit to having this or will that only encourage the idots to waste their time and sometimes ours
*Spellcheck
*articletocategory
*create
*inputbox

We recently added the footnote capability to Marspedia, so that is now the same.   


Other differences:  

* Wikipedia has some cool citation templates which we might add
* Wikipedia reflist template is not available i.e. {{reflist}}
* the Wikipedia [citation needed] template is not available:  {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.


Extensions in the pipeline (maybe):

*Graphviz
*TeX Editor (This is really nice but we had to disable it as there seemed to be a security issue with it)
*WikiTeX (Will take quite some time to install, has a plethora of dependencies)
--&gt;

[[Category:Spacepedia Dictionary]]</text>
    <sha1>c94d820dd95bd279c3daa94d1591971aa72a4b1d</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Dictionary:Main Page</title>
  <ns>3000</ns>
  <id>252</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1413</id>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:01:46Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Strangelv moved page [[Dictionary:Main Page]] to [[Dictionary:Home]]: Compliance with new naming convention</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="29" xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Dictionary:Home]]</text>
    <sha1>444bd009b7edafefe91b6636a383300456de76d8</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Category:Spacepedia Dictionary</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>253</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1416</id>
    <timestamp>2019-04-11T21:08:32Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Strangelv</username>
      <id>3</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>New Category</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="111" xml:space="preserve">This is the planned directory tree for the dictionary being migrated from Exodictionary.org.

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>a07e31453376e1bb2b27673acf2bf36081891671</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Ceres</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>254</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1417</id>
    <timestamp>2019-07-08T21:34:19Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "'''Ceres''' is a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. It is around 500 kilometers in diameter, and is composed of rock and ice.   == Exte..."</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="263" xml:space="preserve">'''Ceres''' is a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.
It is around 500 kilometers in diameter, and is composed of rock and ice.


== External Links ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_(dwarf_planet)
 
[[Category:Astronomy]]</text>
    <sha1>e032d090a5235777ac9c2f750e855406b254f834</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1418</id>
    <parentid>1417</parentid>
    <timestamp>2019-07-08T21:34:42Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="266" xml:space="preserve">'''Ceres''' is a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.
It is around 500 kilometers in diameter, and is composed of rock and ice.


== External Links ==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_(dwarf_planet)
 
[[Category:Solar System]]</text>
    <sha1>b960deafa5d648bec1dee46dfd96b39e6978b52e</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>MediaWiki:Sidebar</title>
  <ns>8</ns>
  <id>5</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1420</id>
    <parentid>619</parentid>
    <timestamp>2020-07-14T05:04:37Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>Jburk</username>
      <id>1</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="392" xml:space="preserve">*Navigation
**mainpage|mainpage
**Category:Main|Browse by Category
**helppage|help
**List of Lists|Needed Articles
&lt;!-- **Exoplatz:Sandbox|Sand Box --&gt;
**recentchanges-url|recentchanges
**randompage-url|randompage
**Special:Search|Search
*Related Wikis
**lunarp:Main_Page|Lunarpedia
**marsp:Main_Page|Marspedia
&lt;!-- **exd:Main_Page|ExoDictionary --&gt;
&lt;!-- **sf:Main_Page|Scientifiction.org --&gt;</text>
    <sha1>66a856a11ee6558c2a28043acfbe8966d3f9b95b</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>User:MLamontagne</title>
  <ns>2</ns>
  <id>255</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1421</id>
    <timestamp>2021-09-02T17:47:21Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "I am a mechanical engineer with a great interest in space. I am also an editor in Marspedia"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="91" xml:space="preserve">I am a mechanical engineer with a great interest in space.
I am also an editor in Marspedia</text>
    <sha1>53db30149f295ba48598b32ee1d2c28c2a5eb456</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Category:Astronautics</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>256</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1422</id>
    <timestamp>2021-09-02T17:48:06Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "Astronautics"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="12" xml:space="preserve">Astronautics</text>
    <sha1>c2400f6eeacb554116ff14e577d4c313e2db2b30</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1423</id>
    <parentid>1422</parentid>
    <timestamp>2021-09-02T17:50:48Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="31" xml:space="preserve">Astronautics

[[Category:Main]]</text>
    <sha1>7c2ec4a6799702109170c00d4f28e6d5736007ec</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Category:Orbital Mechanics</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>257</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1424</id>
    <timestamp>2021-09-02T17:53:04Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "[[Category:Astronautics]]"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Astronautics]]</text>
    <sha1>27ccac45ddb1a3dd34bca0f644da30f13a6663dc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>Category:Propulsion</title>
  <ns>14</ns>
  <id>258</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1425</id>
    <timestamp>2021-09-02T17:53:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "[[Category:Astronautics]]"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="25" xml:space="preserve">[[Category:Astronautics]]</text>
    <sha1>27ccac45ddb1a3dd34bca0f644da30f13a6663dc</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
<page arvcontinue="20190409170750|1369">
  <title>List of Planets</title>
  <ns>0</ns>
  <id>259</id>
  <revision>
    <id>1426</id>
    <timestamp>2021-10-27T12:57:14Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>Created page with "= Solar system planets = Mercury Venus Earth Mars Jupiter Saturn Uranus = Minor planets = Ceres Juno Pluto Eris Makemake"</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="120" xml:space="preserve">= Solar system planets =
Mercury
Venus
Earth
Mars
Jupiter
Saturn
Uranus
= Minor planets =
Ceres
Juno
Pluto
Eris
Makemake</text>
    <sha1>b09d9cf83a305870d28ad71730b3577ba39f22cc</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1427</id>
    <parentid>1426</parentid>
    <timestamp>2021-10-27T12:58:58Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Solar system planets */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="214" xml:space="preserve">= Solar system planets =
* Mercury
* Venus
* Earth
* Mars
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Tenth planet
= Solar system minor planets =
* Ceres
* Juno
* Eris
* Makemake

= Minor planets =
Ceres
Juno
Pluto
Eris
Makemake</text>
    <sha1>e8d300ba21ccdf63fbbf7648f6b00a6c67abef5c</sha1>
  </revision>
  <revision>
    <id>1428</id>
    <parentid>1427</parentid>
    <timestamp>2021-10-27T12:59:25Z</timestamp>
    <contributor>
      <username>MLamontagne</username>
      <id>7</id>
    </contributor>
    <comment>/* Solar system planets */</comment>
    <model>wikitext</model>
    <format>text/x-wiki</format>
    <text bytes="225" xml:space="preserve">= Solar system planets =
* Mercury
* Venus
* Earth
* Mars
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Neptune
* Tenth planet

= Solar system minor planets =
* Ceres
* Juno
* Eris
* Makemake

= Minor planets =
Ceres
Juno
Pluto
Eris
Makemake</text>
    <sha1>1973487b13f777e29bd5b7f190958715680b8b6f</sha1>
  </revision>
</page>
</mediawiki>